On Thu, 2013-03-14 at 17:46 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thursday, March 14, 2013 05:09:59 PM Jiri Kosina wrote: > > On Thu, 14 Mar 2013, Jiri Kosina wrote: > > > > > > > I don't think I have seen this message on rc1+ (8343bce, to be precise), > > > > > but I have definitely seen sluggish system response on that kernel as > > > > > well. > > > > > > > > > > Attaching lspci, /proc/interrupts and dmesg. > > > > > > > > Can you try to do a git bisect for this? Is the sluggish system > > > > response clear enough that you can tell reliably when it is present and > > > > when it isn't? > > > > > > That was my first thought, but unfortunately I am afraid there will be > > > point at which I will easily make a bisection mistake, as the > > > responsiveness of the system varies over time, so it's not really a > > > 100% objective measure. > > > > So I will try a bisect, but it'll take some time so that I could claim it > > to be trustworthy. > > > > Therefore in case anyone has any idea in parallel, I am all ears. > > This one is a candidate to focus on I think: > > commit 181380b702eee1a9aca51354d7b87c7b08541fcf > Author: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Sat Feb 16 11:58:34 2013 -0700 > > PCI/ACPI: Don't cache _PRT, and don't associate them with bus numbers This patch __fixed__ this problem for me in linux-next back in February. Rafael, did you hold back some ACPI patches from 3.9 that would have made fix no longer applicable? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
