From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Aug 7 16:01:14 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A9A910656CD for ; Fri, 7 Aug 2009 16:01:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rnoland@FreeBSD.org) Received: from gizmo.2hip.net (gizmo.2hip.net [64.74.207.195]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F15D18FC35 for ; Fri, 7 Aug 2009 16:01:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.4] (adsl-157-61-83.bna.bellsouth.net [70.157.61.83]) (authenticated bits=0) by gizmo.2hip.net (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n77G1B7d034627 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 7 Aug 2009 12:01:11 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from rnoland@FreeBSD.org) From: Robert Noland To: "C. C. Tang" In-Reply-To: <4A7C0174.7060400@gmail.com> References: <4A7B949B.7010003@gmail.com> <1249615962.1773.150.camel@balrog.2hip.net> <4A7BA95F.6090405@gmail.com> <1249638688.1773.167.camel@balrog.2hip.net> <4A7C0174.7060400@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: FreeBSD Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2009 11:01:05 -0500 Message-Id: <1249660865.1773.168.camel@balrog.2hip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.26.3 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_PBL, RDNS_DYNAMIC,SPF_SOFTFAIL autolearn=no version=3.2.5 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on gizmo.2hip.net Cc: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Subject: Re: acpi_task_0 consuming cpu resource X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2009 16:01:14 -0000 On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 18:27 +0800, C. C. Tang wrote: > > Not sure then... I've got that board swapped out for a VIA board right > > now. It tends to be noisy enough in my office with all the other fans > > running that I really can't hear that one. I did have the smart fan > > control enabled on both the case fan and cpu fan. It also periodically > > rebuilds lots of ports or kernels with -j 5, so if it was going to heat > > up, that should do it... If I can dig up a spare case and power, I'll > > hook it back up and see if I can break it. Otherwise it will have to > > wait until I get done with the VIA driver... I haven't really had any > > issues that I can think of with that board, other than it is a bit slow > > for compiling. It runs amd64 just fine. > > Really thanks for your reply. > I will keeping watching it to see what situation in which the problem > will happen. > I am running on i386 version and I think the compile speed is OK for me. > Anyway it is not a very fast CPU :) > > > Just remembering an issue that I had with some old p4 boxes though. On > > those boxes, when they got hot, they would trigger an acpi message that > > was picked up by devd. There was no way to throttle the messages, so it > > would work the cpu as hard as it could, processing the messages. The > > only solution at that point was to power it off for a few minutes while > > it cooled off and not work it too hard. That sounds like what you are > > seeing. Are you seeing messages in syslog? > > I have just done a > # stress --cpu 1 --io 1 --vm 1 -d 1 > for several hours on the machine. > Although it is not quite stressful, I think it is enough for it to reach > 100% load. > But I didn't notice any such warning in the system log and the > acpi_task_0 problem didn't appear... > > By the way I cannot read any temperature from acpi or smbus except > coretemp. (may be I loaded wrong driver?) > So I am not sure how hot did the system got. Yeah, IIRC coretemp is all I have gotten as well, but that is the important one. robert. > Thanks, > C.C. > -- Robert Noland FreeBSD