On 2019.09.26 09:32 Doug Smythies wrote: > If the deepest idle state is disabled, the system > can become somewhat unstable, with anywhere between no problem > at all, to the occasional temporary jump using a lot more > power for a few seconds, to a permanent jump using a lot more > power continuously. I have been unable to isolate the exact > test load conditions under which this will occur. However, > temporarily disabling and then enabling other idle states > seems to make for a somewhat repeatable test. It is important > to note that the issue occurs with only ever disabling the deepest > idle state, just not reliably. > > I want to know how you want to proceed before I do a bunch of > regression testing.
I did some regression testing anyhow, more to create and debug a methodology than anything else. > On 2018.12.11 03:50 Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >> v7 -> v8: >> * Apply the selection rules to the idle deepest state as well as to >> the shallower ones (the deepest idle state was treated differently >> before by mistake). >> * Subtract 1/2 of the exit latency from the measured idle duration >> in teo_update() (instead of subtracting the entire exit latency). >> This makes the idle state selection be slightly more performance- >> oriented. > > I have isolated the issue to a subset of the v7 to v8 changes, however > it was not the exit latency changes. > > The partial revert to V7 changes I made were (on top of 5.3): The further testing showed a problem or two with my partial teo-v7 reversion (I call it teo-v12) under slightly different testing conditions. I also have a 5.3 based kernel with the current teo reverted and the entire teo-v7 put in its place. I have yet to find a idle state disabled related issue with this kernel. I'll come back to this thread at a later date with better details and test results. ... Doug
