Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261420AbTIOO3R (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Sep 2003 10:29:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261422AbTIOO3R (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Sep 2003 10:29:17 -0400 Received: from chello080109223066.lancity.graz.surfer.at ([80.109.223.66]:31201 "EHLO lexx.delysid.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261420AbTIOO3N (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Sep 2003 10:29:13 -0400 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: 2.6.0-test4 consumes more power than 2.4? From: Mario Lang Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 16:29:08 +0200 Message-ID: <871xui5dmz.fsf@lexx.delysid.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 914 Lines: 31 Hi. While reviewing 2.6 on my laptop, I noticed something very odd. Average power consumption is about 200 mA higher compared to 2.4. I measure this via the /proc/acpi/battery/*/state interface. Under 2.4, when idle my laptop consumes about 720mA, sometimes even below that. Under 2.6, the average idle power consumption is about 900mA. iN both kernels, I have set Performance state 1 (400mhz) before measuring the average power consumption. Can anyone confirm this observation? If so, what is causing this? 200mA is quite a lot of difference, and if this is a true measurement (no ACPI bug), this might be a serious problem for laptop users. -- CYa, Mario - 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/