lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [May]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRE: acpi_idle: Very idle Core i7 machine never enters C3


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Len Brown [mailto:lenb@kernel.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2010 1:43 PM
> To: Philip Langdale
> Cc: Matthew Garrett; Jeff Garrett; Andi Kleen; Linux Kernel Mailing
> List; linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org; Yu, Luming; venki@google.com
> Subject: Re: acpi_idle: Very idle Core i7 machine never enters C3
>
> > >> I am hopeful that the "right thing to do" is to not look at bm-
> status
> > >> and that perhaps there is a bug where we are looking at it
> > >> "by mistake".
> > >
> > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/58962/ - it seems to be a win.
> >
> > Indeed. This patch does solve the C6 problem. I'm not in a position
> to
> > speak about whether there's any undesirable I/O latency, but it
> > passes the basic sanity check.
> >
> > I have filed https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15886 with
> > my acpi dump - assuming that's still useful.
>
> Luming's patch above basically deletes acpi_idle_bm_check() --
> the BM_STS check -- from the C3 path on all Intel SMP boxes.
> This is effectively the same as my test patch
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/77370/
> that made acpi_idle_bm_check() do nothing.
>
> I'm told by the hardware guys that BM_STS is _not_ always
> a NOP, and so we're not supposed to simply ignore it on C3 --
> though it should be extremely rare that we see it set.

On some platforms like NHM-EX, I was told that it's a NOP,
But I might be given wrong information at that time when I wrote that patch.

IIRC, acpi spec just say it's optional..

Thanks,
Luming


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-05-25 08:07    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans