On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 04:50:07PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 10:02:36 +0200 > Karsten Mehrhoff <kawime@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > Using the same .config from 2.6.35.3 to compile 2.5.36.4 results in a > > heavy load with 2.6.35.4. > > A regression within -stable is rather bad. Agreed. > > Example: > > > > Difference between 2.6.35.1/2/3 and 2.6.35.4 while watching some videos: > > 2.6.35.4 switches the cpu for flash videos in the browser (opera or > > iceweasel) or other video outputs to 2200/2400/2600 MHz meanwhile 2.6.35.3 > > (or older) stays at 1000 Mhz. That results in a higher cpu temperature, > > more power consumption and so one. > > > > Using other GUI program results in nearly the same problems with 2.6.35.4, > > so this kernel is unusable for me. > > > > Results to see the difference for the same action > > 2.6.35.4 > > Core0 Temp: +45.0__C > > Core1 Temp: +43.0__C > > cpu MHz: 2200.000 or higher > > > > 2.6.35.3 > > Core0 Temp: +32.0__C > > Core1 Temp: +31.0__C > > cpu MHz: 1000.000 (max. 1800, but falling back to 1000) Can you run 'git bisect' between 2.6.35.3 and 2.6.35.4 to try to find out the offending patch that caused this issue? thanks, greg k-h _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
