From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 29 17:31:12 2008 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 2A4DD16A468 for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:31:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nate@root.org) Received: from root.org (root.org [67.118.192.226]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB8A313C4D1 for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:31:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nate@root.org) Received: (qmail 20069 invoked from network); 29 Jan 2008 17:31:12 -0000 Received: from adsl-71-141-123-117.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO ?192.168.1.77?) (nate-mail@71.141.123.117) by root.org with ESMTPA; 29 Jan 2008 17:31:12 -0000 Message-ID: <479F62D9.6080703@root.org> Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 09:31:05 -0800 From: Nate Lawson User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andriy Gapon References: <479F0ED4.9030709@icyb.net.ua> In-Reply-To: <479F0ED4.9030709@icyb.net.ua> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cx_lowest and CPU usage 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: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:31:12 -0000 Andriy Gapon wrote: > Report for 7.0-RC1 on quite old hardware: 440BX-based motherboard, > 450Mhz Pentium III (Katmai). > > cx_supported claims to support C1, C2, C3. If I set cx_lowest to C3 it > immediately gets backed out to C2 with a kernel message about too many > short sleeps. But that's not a problem. > There is a weird thing: if I change cx_lowest to C2 when the machine is > completely idle, top shows that CPU usage for interrupts immediately > jumps to almost 20%. Change cx_lowest to C1, CPU usage drops back to > almost 0%. > Is this normal ? > If not, does this indicate some problem in idle routine or is this just > incorrect statistics calculation ? Or maybe something with HW ? Leave it at C1. Apparently C2 and C3 don't work on your machine. That's understandable with older, non-laptop hw. -- Nate