Re: [BISECTED] 20 ACPI interrupts per second on EEEPC 4G

Alan Jenkins
2009-04-13T09:39:57Z

yakui_zhao wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-04-12 at 23:54 +0800, Alan Jenkins wrote:
>
>> Alan Jenkins wrote:
>>
>>> Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
>>>
>>>> Alan Jenkins wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On latest git, powertop shows 20 ACPI interrupts per second.
>>>>> Previously, this was closer to 1 per second. See attached output (a
>>>>> vs b, "a" is from 2.6.29-rc8).
>>>>>
>>>>> This is from a pretty sparse KDE desktop. Normally I run
>>>>> gnome-power-manager, but I killed it to make sure that wasn't
>>>>> causing any problems.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> gpe18: 60975 enabled
>>>>> gpe_all: 60975
>>>>> sci: 60975
>>>>>
>>>>> which I presume means lots of EC interrupts.
>>>>>
>>>>> [ 0.134068] ACPI: EC: GPE = 0x18, I/O: command/status = 0x66,
>>>>> data = 0x62
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> This patch looks to be a suspect:
>>>> 34ff4dbccccce54c83b1234d39b7ad9e548a75dd,
>>>> Please check if reversing it helps
>>>>
>>> No, I still get 20 ACPI interrupts per second.
>>>
>>> I tried without powertop, just in case that was provoking it, but it
>>> still happens:
>>>
>>> alan@alan-eeepc:/sys/firmware/acpi/interrupts$ cat sci; sleep 5; cat sci
>>> 2583
>>> 2680
>>>
>> I did wonder whether this was due to thermal polling. So look what I
>> found with bisection :-).
>>
> Does the issue still exist if the following commit is reverted?
> Thanks.
>
>> b1569e99c795bf83b4ddf41c4f1c42761ab7f75e is first bad commit

I was waiting for a more detailed request. It's not immediately obvious
how it should be reverted, given the associated commits which surround it.

Since you asked, I had a go. I got a lot of merge conflicts, so I had
to keep on reverting other patches. This fixed it:

Revert "ACPI: thermal: use .notify method instead of installing
handler directly"
Revert "ACPI: Adjust Kelvin offset to match local implementation"
Revert "trivial: Fix misspelling of "Celsius"."
Revert "proc tty: remove struct tty_operations::read_proc"
Revert "proc tty: add struct tty_operations::proc_fops"
Revert "proc 2/2: remove struct proc_dir_entry::owner"
Revert "thermal: support forcing support for passive cooling"

Revert "ACPI: update thermal for bus_id removal"
Revert "ACPI: move thermal trip handling to generic thermal layer"

and then if I un-revert the last two, I can reproduce it again. I hope
that makes sense :-).

Alan