On Friday 28 March 2008, Pallipadi, Venkatesh wrote: > 100% C0 is not real reading. The problem behind that is there is no wat > to measure exact C1 idle time with halt based C1s. So, we always used to > report 0 time in acpi and that's what is reported by powertop. > This should be fixed in future, as we now export approx time (even > though not exact) in cpuidle and powertop is about to start using it. I just pulled the latest powertop SVN and see it's smarter now. It says over 90% in C1 (doing normal desktop stuff), with nasty IRQ rates but that's the fault of silly desktop code. ;) - Dave -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
