Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753397Ab0D0NOO (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Apr 2010 09:14:14 -0400 Received: from jgarrett.org ([64.5.53.252]:33866 "EHLO jgarrett.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751320Ab0D0NOI (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Apr 2010 09:14:08 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 1603 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2010 09:14:08 EDT Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2010 07:47:03 -0500 To: Philip Langdale Cc: Len Brown , Andi Kleen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: acpi_idle: Very idle Core i7 machine never enters C3 Message-ID: <20100427124703.GA16706@jgarrett.org> References: <20100126084740.GA5265@jgarrett.org> <87y6jkee1b.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> <20100205160900.GA2736@jgarrett.org> <20100426194002.586fbaa5@fido5> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100426194002.586fbaa5@fido5> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) From: jeff@jgarrett.org (Jeff Garrett) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1917 Lines: 51 On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 07:40:02PM -0700, Philip Langdale wrote: > On Fri, 05 Feb 2010 12:45:21 -0500 (EST) > Len Brown wrote: > > Jeff, > > What do you see if you apply just the patch below? > > > > Also, in addition to "powertop -d" to show what the kernel requests, > > please run turbostat to show what the hardware actually did: > > > > http://userweb.kernel.org/~lenb/acpi/utils/pmtools-latest/turbostat/turbostat.c > > > > eg. > > # turbostat -d -v sleep 5 > > > > thanks, > > -Len Brown, Intel Open Source Technology Center > > --- > > To resurrect this thread... > > I have a giga-byte GA-P55M-UD4 motherboard and I have this same problem > as well. Len's patch "works" in that I see C6 being used, but it also > cripples the system - if I do a make -j16 kernel build, I see most jobs > serialized onto one or two cores. Without the patch, I see the > full utilization of all 8 hyper-threads as expected. > > Now, gigabyte have already b0rked these boards up by using the UHCI > controllers on the PCH instead of the rate matching hubs. Maybe that's > directly the cause of BM activity - maybe they screwed something else > up - is it possible for BIOS/ACPI mistakes to lead to this behaviour? > > Jeff - is your board gigabyte too? > > --phil My board identifies it as a Dell. No idea if they rebranded a gigabyte. The patch seems to work for me as well, powertop shows 97.5% c3, turbostat shows 93.6% c6 now. I do get weird latency spikes (on I/O) from time to time. When I was investigating, I completely configured USB off, and it still wouldn't go into deep sleep. Not sure how well that meshes with your UHCI theory. -Jeff -- 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/