On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 22:14:08 -0500 Mark Lord [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
latency. If your app cant take any latency, you should set those... and
the side effect is that the kernel will not do long-latency C-states or
P-state transitions..
..
I don't mind the cpufreq changing (actually, I
Notebook fan runs all the time after suspend to ram.
After suspend to disk fan works OK.
after suspend to ram:
cat /proc/acpi/fan/FAN0/state
status: off
cat /proc/acpi/thermal_zone/TZ00/temperature
temperature: 27 C
cat /proc/acpi/thermal_zone/TZ01/temperature
Remove duplicated warning message in acpi_power_transition()
This warning message is printed by acpi_bus_set_power() so we don't
need to print it again.
Signed-off-by: Miguel Botón [EMAIL PROTECTED]
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/power.c b/drivers/acpi/power.c
index af1769a..b4af974 100644
---
On Sat, 1 Dec 2007 02:17:40 -0800
Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 22:14:08 -0500 Mark Lord [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
latency. If your app cant take any latency, you should set
those... and the side effect is that the kernel will not do
long-latency C-states
On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 18:43:39 -0500
Mark Lord [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dagnabbit.. it's done it again.. went from 100-200 wakeups/sec
back up to 2+ wakeups/sec. This time *with* the powertop patches
in place.
Somethings broken in there, but I don't know what.
Or how to make it happen
Arjan van de Ven wrote:
On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 18:43:39 -0500
Mark Lord [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dagnabbit.. it's done it again.. went from 100-200 wakeups/sec
back up to 2+ wakeups/sec. This time *with* the powertop patches
in place.
Somethings broken in there, but I don't know what.
Or
On Sunday, 2 of December 2007, Mark Lord wrote:
Arjan van de Ven wrote:
On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 18:43:39 -0500
Mark Lord [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dagnabbit.. it's done it again.. went from 100-200 wakeups/sec
back up to 2+ wakeups/sec. This time *with* the powertop patches
in place.
Mark Lord wrote:
Arjan van de Ven wrote:
On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 22:31:17 -0500
Mark Lord [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
Speaking of which.. what's with powertop on 2.6.24 ???
It's gone from 100-200 wakeups/sec to 2 wakeups/sec !!!
ho hum.. Lenovo T61?
I have some reports that that
On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 18:55:48 -0500
Mark Lord [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Arjan van de Ven wrote:
On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 18:43:39 -0500
Mark Lord [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dagnabbit.. it's done it again.. went from 100-200 wakeups/sec
back up to 2+ wakeups/sec. This time *with* the
Hi,
On Sunday 02 December 2007, Arjan van de Ven wrote in Re: 2+
wake-ups/second in 2.6.24. Bug?:
Mark Lord [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2.6.23 did not have this problem.
actually we have reports of 2.6.23 having the exact same problem.
The thing is, something is causing the system
I lost some e-mail between Nov-24 and today
when my laptop went nuts on the road.
Dunno if the cause was that my latop updated itself to FC9 early release,
or if I did something foolish when slinging around mail archives
between desktop and laptop.
In any case, if you sent me something in the
Applied to ACPI tree.
Linus,
I reproduced this issue on my T61, and saw it go away w/ this patch.
I'll be sending you a pull request probably Sunday night w/ this
pach in it. But if you are in a hurry to cut rc4 before then,
consider this an Acked-by: Len Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]
thanks,
-Len
12 matches
Mail list logo
