Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753264Ab0BUVCL (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Feb 2010 16:02:11 -0500 Received: from mga03.intel.com ([143.182.124.21]:32371 "EHLO mga03.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753144Ab0BUVCI convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Feb 2010 16:02:08 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,512,1262592000"; d="scan'208";a="246414992" From: "Pallipadi, Venkatesh" To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Guennadi Liakhovetski CC: "linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org" , LKML , ACPI Devel Maling List , Len Brown , Arjan van de Ven Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2010 13:02:19 -0800 Subject: RE: What's the right value for idle= (was: Re: [linux-pm] regression on P-II SMP) Thread-Topic: What's the right value for idle= (was: Re: [linux-pm] regression on P-II SMP) Thread-Index: AcqzNWpNFsbzVWwvTU653Kc/aTgrPAAA0QCQ Message-ID: <7C53B33EE871F14797C999838AA8B5A9143F39E1@orsmsx505.amr.corp.intel.com> References: <201002212136.03783.rjw@sisk.pl> In-Reply-To: <201002212136.03783.rjw@sisk.pl> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2017 Lines: 49 >-----Original Message----- >From: Rafael J. Wysocki [mailto:rjw@sisk.pl] >Sent: Sunday, February 21, 2010 12:36 PM >To: Guennadi Liakhovetski >Cc: linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org; LKML; ACPI Devel >Maling List; Pallipadi, Venkatesh; Len Brown; Arjan van de Ven >Subject: What's the right value for idle= (was: Re: [linux-pm] >regression on P-II SMP) > >On Sunday 21 February 2010, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: >> Hi >> >> my 2xP-II@400MHz locks up with 2.6.32(.X) unless I specify >"idle=*" on the >> kernel command-line, where "*" is one of "poll," "mwait," >"halt," and only >> "nomwait" indeed locks it up. Last kernel known to work was >2.6.25. So, it >> doesn't bother me all that much - I have a way to boot it, but maybe >> someone would be interested to fix this (this system already >has a few >> quirks on the kernel command line, so, one more doesn't >really hurt;)). >> What interests me more - which of those shall I be using? From >> Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt it looks like "mwait" >should be best >> for me? Or should I be using "halt?" "Poll" does indeed fry >CPUs - raises >> sys temperatures to 50 / 60 degrees C. Power-saving is not >that much of a >> concern for me - I only run that system occasionally, but it >shouldn't >> produce more heat than it must;) And since this system does >have a broken >> ACPI (Compaq AP400), I wouldn't try to be too smart with it. > >I guess "mwait" is the right one, but let's try to ask experts. > This CPU doesn't support mwait. So, idle=halt is what you should be using. That said, halt based idle is what should be used on this system by default, unless it supports ACPI based C-states. Can you send in the dmesg, with 2.6.25 without any boot parameter. Thanks, Venki-- 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/