Re: 2.6.24 still causes 1000Hz wakeups on x86_64

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



-------- Original Message  --------
Subject: Re:2.6.24 still causes 1000Hz wakeups on x86_64
From: Jonathan Underwood <jonathan.underwood@xxxxxxxxx>
To: mike@xxxxxxxxxx, For users of Fedora <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 03/15/2008 08:21 PM

On 15/03/2008, Mike Cronenworth <mike@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
What's the deal? The tickless kernel shouldn't be causing wakeups at
 idle, correct?

 On a Pentium 4 3ghz HT machine, 2.6.24 shows very little wakeups
 occuring, but on my Core 2 Duo 2.1ghz machine I'm getting over 1000
 wakeups and it's keeping one core fully awake.

 powertop output:
 Top causes for wakeups:
  88.4% (1000.0)          events/0 : run_workqueue (ir_timer)
   5.5% ( 62.0)       <interrupt> : uhci_hcd:usb3, ahci, nvidia
   1.2% ( 13.2)       <interrupt> : uhci_hcd:usb4, libata
   1.1% ( 12.0)   <kernel module> : usb_hcd_poll_rh_status (rh_timer_func)
   0.9% ( 10.0)     <kernel core> : ehci_irq (ehci_watchdog)
   0.5% (  5.2)   thunderbird-bin : futex_wait (hrtimer_wakeup)

 On my P4 machine, "events/0 : run_workqueue" is further down on the list
 and isn't causing major wakeups.

 Both test machines are using Fedora 8. Latest updates. XFCE desktop. No
 process or applications are running (besides Thunderbird, obviously).
 Google searching resulted in nothing positive. Am I the only one?


On my intel core 2 duo laptop, I don't see the problem you report:

Wakeups-from-idle per second : 177.2    interval: 10.0s
no ACPI power usage estimate available

Top causes for wakeups:
  35.2% ( 58.5)      npviewer.bin : schedule_timeout (process_timeout)
  26.9% ( 44.6)      <kernel IPI> : Rescheduling interrupts
   7.8% ( 13.0)       <interrupt> : iwl3945
   5.2% (  8.6)       <interrupt> : libata
   3.8% (  6.3)       file-roller : schedule_timeout (process_timeout)
   2.8% (  4.7)                 X : do_setitimer (it_real_fn)


But you're probably seeing a legitimate bug (perhaps incorrect boot
time selection of clock source or something). It's probably worth
reporting this as a bug with as much detail about your hardware as you
can (lspci -vv etc).

Jonathan.



Thanks, I have added a new bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=437672


 Regards,
 Michael


 --
 fedora-list mailing list
 fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
 To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list


--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
[Index of Archives]     [Older Fedora Users]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Package Announce]     [EPEL Announce]     [Fedora Magazine]     [Fedora News]     [Fedora Summer Coding]     [Fedora Laptop]     [Fedora Cloud]     [Fedora Advisory Board]     [Fedora Education]     [Fedora Security]     [Fedora Scitech]     [Fedora Robotics]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Infrastructure]     [Fedora Websites]     [Anaconda Devel]     [Fedora Devel Java]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora Fonts]     [ATA RAID]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Management Tools]     [Fedora Mentors]     [SSH]     [Fedora Package Review]     [Fedora R Devel]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kickstart]     [Fedora Music]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Centos]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Fedora Legal]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora OCaml]     [Coolkey]     [Virtualization Tools]     [ET Management Tools]     [Yum Users]     [Tux]     [Yosemite News]     [Gnome Users]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Art]     [Fedora Docs]     [Asterisk PBX]     [Fedora Sparc]     [Fedora Universal Network Connector]     [Libvirt Users]     [Fedora ARM]

  Powered by Linux