linux-kernel - Re: [Bug #12152] Huge wakeups number from i1915

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <200812080015.25742.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date:	Mon, 8 Dec 2008 00:15:25 +0100
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Cc:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Kernel Testers List <kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Yves-Alexis Perez" <corsac@...ian.org>
Subject: Re: [Bug #12152] Huge wakeups number from i1915

On Monday, 8 of December 2008, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Dec 2008 23:52:06 +0100
> "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl> wrote:
> 
> > On Sunday, 7 of December 2008, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > > On Sun,  7 Dec 2008 21:32:54 +0100 (CET)
> > > "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a
> > > > report of recent regressions.
> > > > 
> > > > The following bug entry is on the current list of known
> > > > regressions from 2.6.27.  Please verify if it still should be
> > > > listed and let me know (either way).
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Bug-Entry	:
> > > > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12152
> > > > Subject		: Huge wakeups number from i1915
> > > > Submitter	: Yves-Alexis Perez <corsac@...ian.org>
> > > > Date		: 2008-12-02 16:48 (6 days old)
> > > > References	:
> > > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-acpi&m=122823656702994&w=4
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > at least in some of the cases where this has been seen the cause is
> > > the following:
> > > The i915 DRM driver used to do polling for completion, busy
> > > waiting. It moved to be interrupt driven, which is usually better
> > > for power, but it will show up as more wakeups in powertop....
> > 
> > IOW, this is not a regression?
> 
> I don't know about this specifc case (not enough information) but for
> the case I described it's not a regression. Going to interrupt driven
> from busy waiting is an improvement not a regression :)

Sure it is. :-)

Let's wait for the reporter to respond.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/