[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201002212136.03783.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2010 21:36:03 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To: Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@....de>
Cc: linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
Venki Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
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@...MHz 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.
Rafael
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists