Hey, On Sun, May 09, 2010 at 09:28:50AM +1000, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > On 09/05/10 05:16, Len Brown wrote: > > (linux-pm cc'd) > > > >> I'm seeing a huge number of load balancing tick wakeups, with both 2.6.33 and > >> current git (f1c448e0a9e99c76f4ece368714fb35a40a8daba). > >> > >> This has been reported as a bug in some distros: > >> > >> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=521944 > >> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/524281 > > > > Unclear if your sighting is the same as those two. > > > > What do you see if vmware is not present? > > I still see a huge number, just not as huge. The number of load > balancing ticks seems to increase with the number of ticks from other > sources. Without vmware running I got: > > Cn Avg residency > C0 (cpu running) (14.5%) > polling 0.2ms ( 0.0%) > C1 mwait 0.0ms ( 0.0%) > C2 mwait 0.1ms ( 1.7%) > C4 mwait 1.1ms (83.8%) > P-states (frequencies) > Turbo Mode 1.2% > 2.21 Ghz 0.0% > 1.60 Ghz 0.0% > 1200 Mhz 0.1% > 800 Mhz 98.7% > Wakeups-from-idle per second : 907.4 interval: 15.0s > no ACPI power usage estimate available > Top causes for wakeups: > 42.1% (435.6) [kernel scheduler] Load balancing tick > 21.2% (219.6) [extra timer interrupt] > 10.2% (105.6) plugin-containe > 9.5% ( 98.1) pulseaudio > 1.7% ( 17.9) [Rescheduling interrupts] <kernel IPI> > 1.7% ( 17.1) [iwl3945] <interrupt> > 1.4% ( 14.8) [kernel core] hrtimer_start (tick_sched_timer) > 1.4% ( 14.3) [ata_piix] <interrupt> Seems to be exactly what I'm seeing here, too. See my description and possible patch at http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/4/26/249 Suresh Siddha reported he's working on getting some (more advanced) patches ready for submission. Best, Dominik _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
