From owner-freebsd-mobile@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 29 19:22:57 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E94F106564A for ; Tue, 29 Apr 2008 19:22:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-mobile@m.gmane.org) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CFB88FC1A for ; Tue, 29 Apr 2008 19:22:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-mobile@m.gmane.org) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JqvPh-0001p9-O0 for freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org; Tue, 29 Apr 2008 19:22:53 +0000 Received: from r5h15.net.upc.cz ([86.49.7.15]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 29 Apr 2008 19:22:53 +0000 Received: from gamato by r5h15.net.upc.cz with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 29 Apr 2008 19:22:53 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org From: martinko Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 21:22:45 +0200 Lines: 43 Message-ID: <48177585.3040103@users.sf.net> References: <480E41FB.2080503@users.sf.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: r5h15.net.upc.cz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.8.1.13) Gecko/20080402 SeaMonkey/1.1.9 In-Reply-To: Sender: news Subject: Re: battery monitor with KDE 64 bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile computing with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 19:22:57 -0000 Ian Smith wrote: > On Tue, 22 Apr 2008, mato wrote: > > Ian Smith wrote: > > > FWIW, I've also long used sysutils/ascpu as a 60sec visual load monitor, > > > matching asapm's 'look', res. size and low cpu usage. At ~7days uptime: > > > > > > 3680 smithi 8 0 2344K 448K nanslp 44:06 0.00% 0.00% asapm > > > 3681 smithi 8 0 2564K 448K nanslp 41:53 0.00% 0.00% ascpu > > > 3514 root 96 0 1280K 264K select 36:32 0.00% 0.00% moused > > > > > > > > > > There's something wrong with asapm or with my system -- I configured > > asapm for 5 seconds updating (as opposed to default 1s) and after 3 > > hours of uptime it already consumed 30 CPU-seconds. (!) > > Yeah Martin, that seems a lot; mine's using ~6 seconds per day. Perhaps > to do with running on amd64 rather than i386, though I've no idea why, > unless it's much busier with ACPI than with APM. > > Might be worth trying with the explicit -acpi switch, in case it tries > using the apm-over-acpi calls on your system? Pure speculation .. > > Are you running any commands on any conditions from the resource file? > I don't use ~/.asapmrc at all, just run 'asapm -lower forestgreen'. > Funny.. when I run it with -acpi I get the following: $ asapm -withdrawn -u 5 -acpi asapm: Neither ACPI nor APM are available! and it quits. When run w/o -acpi it works OK. Hm.. M. PS: I do use ~/.asapmrc but I don't think that is the culprit as asapm consumes CPU even when there are no actions triggered (always running on AC power).