From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1752843Ab3LJLlf (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 10 Dec 2013 06:41:35 -0500
Received: from mail-ea0-f171.google.com ([209.85.215.171]:45167 "EHLO
	mail-ea0-f171.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752413Ab3LJLlb (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 10 Dec 2013 06:41:31 -0500
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 12:41:27 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@online.de>
Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Jeremy Eder <jeder@redhat.com>, x86@kernel.org
Subject: Re: 50 Watt idle power regression bisected to Linux-3.10
Message-ID: <20131210114127.GA29875@gmail.com>
References: <CAJvTdK=+aNN66mYpCGgbHGCHhYQAKx-vB0kJSWjVpsNb_hOAtQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1386405590.5673.96.camel@marge.simpson.net>
 <CAJvTdKkQUKFhwswK64PDNgPOMxP4s2X1GYKzWLW0G6gWxhdWtA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJvTdK=9DVxY9xWCo=SSF-Rx3dFfZtkrubhtcgxxowj-rbi8LQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1386443836.5335.38.camel@marge.simpson.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1386443836.5335.38.camel@marge.simpson.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org


* Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@online.de> wrote:

> On Sat, 2013-12-07 at 11:45 -0500, Len Brown wrote: 
> > >> It fixes that, except for my Q6600 box.  Too bad mwait_idle() went away,
> > >> beloved old box doesn't play hints game, so it continues to flog itself.
> > 
> > 
> > Thanks for pointing this out, Mike!
> > 
> > A Q6600 is a Kentsfield.  I dug one of those up.
> > Indeed, the only idle capabilities it has are  HALT
> > and old style MWAIT, and the latter is much more effective.
> > running 3.8 it idles at 75 watts.
> > running 3.8 with idle=nomwait it idles at 100 watts,
> > which is what it will do with 3.9 and later due to the patch below.
> > 
> > commit 69fb3676df3329a7142803bb3502fa59dc0db2e3
> > Author: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
> > Date:   Sun Feb 10 01:38:39 2013 -0500
> > 
> >     x86 idle: remove mwait_idle() and "idle=mwait" cmdline param
> > 
> > Kentsfield proves that patch was based on a fault assumption.
> > Sweet box in its day, ECC memory and everything -- probably still
> > a fair number of them running...
> > 
> > Plus, I've found another machine that depends on having an idle=mwait
> > idle loop (A Sony Vaio BIOS SMM code apparently assumes we use it in
> > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=60770)
> > 
> > So it looks like I need to (also) restore the simple idle=mwait idle loop
> > to make some machines happy.
> 
> Cool, box will definitely be happier.

I assume old-style MWAIT will be activated automatically on such 
boxes, there's no need to pass in idle=mwait on the boot command line, 
correct?

Thanks,

	Ingo