[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: The SpedStep crash problem ...



Martin Skøtt [martin@z3n.dk] wrote:
>
> OK, we are now a couple of people here on the list who are struggling with 
> random crashes of our laptops. The standard solution is to disable SpeedStep
> in the BIOS. Until now this haven't helped on my machine, but I have many
> SpeedStep settings and I still haven't tried all of them.
> Disabling SpeedStep is a workaround, but it's not acceptible for me as a 
> private laptop buyer. What is the problem with Linux and SpeedStep? Does it 
> affect all machines (judgeing from this list, no) and what is that happen? In 
> my own case it has always happened while running on AC power, but a good 
> explanation to this is that I run on AC 99% of the time. My model of machine[1]
> can be delivered with Linux pre-installed by IBM and they don't mention any 
> problems nor do they mention that SpeedStep has been disabled so they must have
> a workaround. 
>
erm a small thing to mention.  Speedstep = bollocks (in a word).  The reason 
it came about was because macrocroft refused to create a patch that called 
the cpu cooling instruction (HLT) when the machine was idle.  This ment 
although your machine is not 100% busy it is 100% active.  The HLT command 
tells the CPU to turn off power for a short time to most of the active parts 
on the chip.  This increases battery life.  Is this *unacceptable*?

The solution that the computer world came up with was that if the CPU 
*detected* that it was idle (although not calling the HLT instruction) it 
would clock itsself down and saves power at a lower clock speed, however 
this is *not* as efficient as the HLT instruction (I have found through 
experimentation).

Now when this happens it heavily messes up the Bogo MIP rating in the kernel 
and things go bad from there!  This is what the problem is, a timing loop!

Now as I said before and others have said (with damn good reason) turn *OFF* 
speedstep and use HLT instead.  <Mr_T> Damn Fool </Mr_T>.  If this is *still* 
unacceptable then ask Intel for the nice documentation and write the damn 
support into the kernel yourself.  Otherwise learn to use Google and Deja and 
use the linux utility to control speedstep under linux (look under 
alt.comp.portable.linux , if I remember correctly for the thread, it was 
about 2-4 weeks ago).

>From a *good* laptop you should get about 3-4 hours battery life from a 
single charge on a single battery.  If this doesn't happen get a proper 
laptop and stop treating a laptop like a desktop, you paid an extra $500 or 
so it was small, not so it would be a cosmetic toy that became *unacceptable* 
because you cannot use Google or Deja (aka groups.google.com).

Alex



Reply to: