Hi!
> Tony Hoyle wrote:
>
> I'm talking to myself :-)
>
> OK I see that safe_halt() will re-enable interrupts. However this is only
> called in S1. If your machine gets as far as S3 you have...
>
> for (;;) {
> unsigned long time;
> unsigned long di
Grover, Andrew wrote:
> Since you have a symtomatic system, if you're willing to do some testing to
> either prove or disprove your theory (that entering C2/C3 interrupts enabled
> helps things) I would greatly appreciate it.
Leaving interrupts enabled does help a little, but the machine is stil
> From: Tony Hoyle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> OK I see that safe_halt() will re-enable interrupts. However
> this is only
> called in S1. If your machine gets as far as S3 you have...
I think you mean C1 and C3, but I know what you mean.. :)
[C3 code snipped]
> There is no halt here... the
Tony Hoyle wrote:
I'm talking to myself :-)
OK I see that safe_halt() will re-enable interrupts. However this is only
called in S1. If your machine gets as far as S3 you have...
for (;;) {
unsigned long time;
unsigned long diff;
__c
I've been trying to track down what makes ACPI kill the system in 2.4.1.
In the acpi_idle function (drivers/acpi/cpu.c), it seems to spend most
of its time with interrupts disabled, only enabling them to check
need_resched occasionally.
In the 'sleep1' state the following code is executed:
5 matches
Mail list logo
