>-----Original Message----- >From: Rafael J. Wysocki [mailto:rjw@xxxxxxx] >Sent: Sunday, February 21, 2010 12:36 PM >To: Guennadi Liakhovetski >Cc: linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; LKML; ACPI Devel >Maling List; Pallipadi, Venkatesh; Len Brown; Arjan van de Ven >Subject: What's the right value for idle= (was: Re: [linux-pm] >regression on P-II SMP) > >On Sunday 21 February 2010, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: >> Hi >> >> my 2xP-II@400MHz locks up with 2.6.32(.X) unless I specify >"idle=*" on the >> kernel command-line, where "*" is one of "poll," "mwait," >"halt," and only >> "nomwait" indeed locks it up. Last kernel known to work was >2.6.25. So, it >> doesn't bother me all that much - I have a way to boot it, but maybe >> someone would be interested to fix this (this system already >has a few >> quirks on the kernel command line, so, one more doesn't >really hurt;)). >> What interests me more - which of those shall I be using? From >> Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt it looks like "mwait" >should be best >> for me? Or should I be using "halt?" "Poll" does indeed fry >CPUs - raises >> sys temperatures to 50 / 60 degrees C. Power-saving is not >that much of a >> concern for me - I only run that system occasionally, but it >shouldn't >> produce more heat than it must;) And since this system does >have a broken >> ACPI (Compaq AP400), I wouldn't try to be too smart with it. > >I guess "mwait" is the right one, but let's try to ask experts. > This CPU doesn't support mwait. So, idle=halt is what you should be using. That said, halt based idle is what should be used on this system by default, unless it supports ACPI based C-states. Can you send in the dmesg, with 2.6.25 without any boot parameter. Thanks, Venki-- 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
