Messages in this thread | | | From | Len Brown <> | Subject | Re: 2.6.19.2 sky2/acpi crashes | Date | Wed, 24 Jan 2007 14:51:52 -0500 |
| |
On Wednesday 24 January 2007 07:23, Lionel Landwerlin wrote: > Le mardi 23 janvier 2007 à 21:36 -0500, Len Brown a écrit : > > > > > Apple Macbook 2GHz (x86, not amd64) > > > > > > > > > Please try to remove processor module. > > > > > > > > > > > > Ok, that's done. Same problem. > > > > > > > > > > any difference with "idle=poll"? > > > > > if yes, how about "idle=halt"? > > > > > > > > idle=poll seems to fix the problem (cpu fan is running almost at full > > > > speed). Maybe I should run a longer test... For now it consists to run > > > > about 15 torrents and watching HDTV through ethernet device. > > > > > > > > idle=halt does not : > > > > > > It sounds like issues relative to Processor C state. > > > Please enter a bug in ACPI category on bugzilla.kernel.org > > > > Actually, the test above with the processor module removed proved > > that it isn't ACPI C-states -- as they will not be available. > > You should be able to observe that /proc/acpi/processor/*/power > > does not indicate any C-state use when processor is unloaded. > > > > My guess was that some deep C-state with long exit latency > > was interfering with the device. booting w/o the processor > > module should have left you running the native mwait idle. > > booting with idle=halt should have left you running the HLT idle. > > booting with idle=poll is a busy spin loop that never enters > > any hardware power saving state. > > > > I'm quite puzzled that idle=halt was not sufficient to solve the issue, > > because that should be the lowest exit latency idle loop. > > So maybe I'm wrong about the cause -- though I can't then > > explain why idle=poll helps... > > > > All of the idle selection options cause the kernel to print > > a line with the word "idle" in it. Perhaps you could search > > your dmesg for "idle" to verify that it is running what we > > think it is? > > Here I join the complete log for idle=halt
it is indeed doing what you asked it to Jan 24 01:11:21 cocoduo kernel: [ 30.741018] using halt in idle threads.
> I'm running idle=poll for more 1 hour now with heavy ethernet load, no > crash. It usualy happens in 10~15mn with idle=halt and 4~5mn with no > idle option.
I think my guess is wrong. If idle=halt doesn't help, then the failure doesn't have anything to do with the idle loop and power saving idle states.
I can't explain why idle=poll helps.
-Len - 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/
| |