[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201009171002.09187.simon.farnsworth@onelan.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2010 10:02:08 +0100
From: Simon Farnsworth <simon.farnsworth@...lan.co.uk>
To: intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org
Cc: Vasily Khoruzhick <anarsoul@...il.com>,
Sitsofe Wheeler <sitsofe@...oo.com>,
Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@...gle.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] Interrupt latency on some 945GM platforms
On Thursday 16 September 2010, Vasily Khoruzhick <anarsoul@...il.com> wrote:
> В сообщении от 15 of September 2010 01:41:11 автор Sitsofe Wheeler написал:
> > > > processor.max_cstate=2
> > >
> > > Nope, it doesn't work with max_cstate=2
> >
> > Perhaps intel_idle is being used? Any mention of it in dmesg?
>
> Sitsofe, maybe you misunderstood me, I mean with max_cstate=1 graphics is
> smooth, with higher values (i.e. max_cstate=2) graphics is jerky.
>
> Btw, Jesse, any comments/solutions/workarounds except one with
> processor.max_cstate=1 in kernel commandline? Should I file a bug on fdo
> bugzilla?
This looks like a problem I've seen on some hardware.
My workaround has been to use the pm_qos /dev/cpu_dma_latency interface to
request a maximum latency of 1ms (value chosen as definitely small enough - a
larger value may be better, but I don't care about power saving at runtime on
my kit).
If it's happening on other kit, perhaps the i915 driver should make a suitable
pm_qos request itself. Jesse, can you comment?
--
Simon Farnsworth
Software Engineer
ONELAN Limited
http://www.onelan.com/
--
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