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

Bug#470474: marked as done (cpufrequtils: Laptop limited to 1.2GHz vs 2.2GHz when no battery, running on AC only.)

Your message dated Wed, 7 Jul 2010 21:44:33 +0200
with message-id <20100707194433.GB2169@galadriel.inutil.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#470474: cpufrequtils: Laptop limited to 1.2GHz vs 2.2GHz when no battery, running on AC only.
has caused the Debian Bug report #470474,
regarding cpufrequtils: Laptop limited to 1.2GHz vs 2.2GHz when no battery, running on AC only.
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
470474: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=470474
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: cpufrequtils
Version: 002-7.2
Severity: normal


Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU     T7500  @ 2.20GHz

Lenovo T61 6465CTO with 4GB of memory, running a 32-bit kernel, for
various reasons.

With a Battery in the battery bay I get full use of ondemand or any
other govenor. All avaialable frequencies can be used.

As soon as I go full AC only, using only the power brick, as I don't
want to
boil out my batteries, I get imited to 800MHz and 1200MHz.

I use this machine as my primary machine when at my desk. I have
secondary chargers to maintain my batteries and typically take out the
battery to prolong its life and run on only AC.

As soon as I take out the battery, the machine goes to 1200MHz down from
2201MHz for a maximum frequency, nothing I can set or echo or anything
will change this.

I no longer have any other kernel on this machine, as I cleaned up
recently. I do know that this did not happen with 2.6.22, 2.6.21, being
the first kernels on this machine.

At least I do not recall having any issues with speed, when using this
machine. I first noticed this when the 2.6.24 kernel was installed and
rebooted to it, things were a bit slow and pauses happened regularly. I
just assumed it was the new scheduler.

What other info do you need from me?


-- System Information:
Debian Release: lenny/sid
  APT prefers unstable
    APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
    Architecture: i386 (i686)

    Kernel: Linux 2.6.24-1-686-bigmem (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
    Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
    Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash

    Versions of packages cpufrequtils depends on:
    ii  debconf [debconf-2.0]         1.5.19     Debian configuration
    management sy
    ii  libc6                         2.7-9      GNU C Library: Shared
    libraries
    ii  libcpufreq0                   002-7.2    shared library to deal
    with the cp
    ii  lsb-base                      3.2-4      Linux Standard Base 3.2
    init scrip

    cpufrequtils recommends no packages.

    -- debconf information:
      cpufrequtils/enable: true

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 10:12:31AM -0400, Greg Folkert wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-05-30 at 14:42 +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> > On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 01:05:50AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2010-05-03 at 12:19 -0400, Greg Folkert wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 2010-05-03 at 15:41 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > > [...]
> > > > > 
> > > > > Please report this upstream at <https://bugzilla.kernel.org> under
> > > > > product 'Power Management, component 'cpufreq'.  Let us know the bug
> > > > > number so that we can track it.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Ben.
> > > > 
> > > > Umm, hmmm. This bug has been open for a number of years and has existed
> > > > through any number of kernels. I thought the whole reason I'd use the
> > > > Distro bugs system was to not have to deal with and make sure Debian
> > > > gave back etc. etc. etc...
> > > 
> > > I'm sorry that no-one advised you to do this earlier.  It is very
> > > unlikely to be a Debian-specific problem and this is not an area where
> > > anyone on the Debian kernel team has specific knowledge.
> > > 
> > > > I guess I must do this myself, rather than use Debian systems to get
> > > > things working.
> > > 
> > > The upstream developers will need to ask you more questions.  If we
> > > report the bug then the questions will go to us and we will just have to
> > > forward them to you, which will slow down solution of the bug.
> > > 
> > > Once you have reported the bug in Bugzilla, we can link it to the Debian
> > > bug and track its progress.
> > 
> > Did you report this at bugzilla.kernel.org?
> 
> No, I don't have any time now with the job I have. The problem is worse
> than ever with the NEW kernel linux-image-2.6.32-5-686-bigmem v2.6.32-13
> 
> I don't even get ANY changes from 800MHz except when I restart
> cpufreqd... various amounts of time... but no more than 2 minutes of
> 2.2GHz per restart. Its pegged at 800MHz and stays there.
> 
> This is bull. Just close this bug. I don't want to deal with it
> anymore...

Ok, closing the bug, then.

Cheers,
        Moritz

--- End Message ---
Reply to: