ACPI vs. APM - Which is better for desktop and why?

ACPI vs. APM - Which is better for desktop and why?

[Justin Piszcz]

I have enabled ACPI on my Dell GX1 (Pentium 3/500MHZ) machine and disabled 
APM, however, what are the benefits of using ACPI over APM?

I am using Kernel 2.6.7

I see ACPI eats up an IRQ and does not share it:

$ cat /proc/interrupts
            CPU0
   0:   64997374          XT-PIC  timer
   1:         10          XT-PIC  i8042
   2:          0          XT-PIC  cascade
   5:       2625          XT-PIC  Crystal audio controller
   8:          1          XT-PIC  rtc
   9:          0          XT-PIC  acpi
  10:     277489          XT-PIC  ide2
  11:   11465050          XT-PIC  ide4, ide5, eth0, eth1, eth2, eth3
  12:         58          XT-PIC  i8042
  14:     307536          XT-PIC  ide0
  15:         53          XT-PIC  ide1
NMI:          0
LOC:   65007290
ERR:          0
MIS:          0

Re: ACPI vs. APM - Which is better for desktop and why?

[Kalin KOZHUHAROV]

Justin Piszcz wrote:
> I have enabled ACPI on my Dell GX1 (Pentium 3/500MHZ) machine and 
> disabled APM, however, what are the benefits of using ACPI over APM?
> 
> I am using Kernel 2.6.7
> 
> I see ACPI eats up an IRQ and does not share it:
> 
> $ cat /proc/interrupts
>            CPU0
>   0:   64997374          XT-PIC  timer
>   1:         10          XT-PIC  i8042
>   2:          0          XT-PIC  cascade
>   5:       2625          XT-PIC  Crystal audio controller
>   8:          1          XT-PIC  rtc
>   9:          0          XT-PIC  acpi
>  10:     277489          XT-PIC  ide2
>  11:   11465050          XT-PIC  ide4, ide5, eth0, eth1, eth2, eth3
>  12:         58          XT-PIC  i8042
>  14:     307536          XT-PIC  ide0
>  15:         53          XT-PIC  ide1
> NMI:          0
> LOC:   65007290
> ERR:          0
> MIS:          0
> 
Yep, IRQ 11 is a bit crowded...

I was just about to ask a similar question...
How do I have a better interrupt table (no or less shared intrerupts) with ACPI?

My system (just rebooted) says:
 $ cat /proc/interrupts 
           CPU0       
  0:    1434691    IO-APIC-edge  timer
  1:       5158    IO-APIC-edge  i8042
  8:          2    IO-APIC-edge  rtc
  9:          0   IO-APIC-level  acpi
 14:       8097    IO-APIC-edge  ide0
 15:        959    IO-APIC-edge  ide1
 19:     105118   IO-APIC-level  nvidia
 20:      17455   IO-APIC-level  ehci_hcd, eth0, NVidia nForce2
 21:          0   IO-APIC-level  ohci_hcd
 22:      16156   IO-APIC-level  ohci_hcd
NMI:          0 
LOC:    1434624 
ERR:          0
MIS:          0

The "problem" here might be IRQ 20 when I am using my scanner@4800dpi (USB2.0, Epson GT-X700) writing the output via NFS (through eth0). Will test the numbers some other time.

Kalin.


-- 
||///_ o  *****************************
||//'_/>     WWW: http://ThinRope.net/

Re: ACPI vs. APM - Which is better for desktop and why?

[Felipe Alfaro Solana]

On Thu, 2004-06-17 at 13:10 -0400, Justin Piszcz wrote:
> I have enabled ACPI on my Dell GX1 (Pentium 3/500MHZ) machine and disabled 
> APM, however, what are the benefits of using ACPI over APM?

Well, I can't tell for sure... ACPI is supposed to offer better power
management and battery usage for laptops, while being more flexible than
APM.

The truth is that on my laptop, both work equally well but since ACPI is
still less mature than APM, I chose to use ACPI in order to test it and
helping in its future development.

> 
> I am using Kernel 2.6.7
> 
> I see ACPI eats up an IRQ and does not share it:

I wouldn't mind about IRQ's...

RE: ACPI vs. APM - Which is better for desktop and why?

[Piszcz, Justin Michael]

Is there any performance degradation when using ACPI as it uses IRQ 9,
therefore forcing more devices to share IRQ's thus possibly decreasing
performance?


-----Original Message-----
From: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
[mailto:linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Felipe Alfaro
Solana
Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2004 2:27 PM
To: Justin Piszcz
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ACPI vs. APM - Which is better for desktop and why?

On Thu, 2004-06-17 at 13:10 -0400, Justin Piszcz wrote:
> I have enabled ACPI on my Dell GX1 (Pentium 3/500MHZ) machine and
disabled 
> APM, however, what are the benefits of using ACPI over APM?

Well, I can't tell for sure... ACPI is supposed to offer better power
management and battery usage for laptops, while being more flexible than
APM.

The truth is that on my laptop, both work equally well but since ACPI is
still less mature than APM, I chose to use ACPI in order to test it and
helping in its future development.

> 
> I am using Kernel 2.6.7
> 
> I see ACPI eats up an IRQ and does not share it:

I wouldn't mind about IRQ's...

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel"
in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/