FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > CentOS > CentOS

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 02-12-2012, 10:39 PM
Michael Lampe
 
Default Anyone already tried to backport the latest ASPM kernel patch to 6.2?

Patrick Lists wrote:

> Iirc to enable ASPM on Fedora the kernel must be booted with
> pcie_aspm=force. Maybe you need to use that option too? For more info
> see:
> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux_aspm_solution&num =1

That's no general solution. It may work, but (e.g.) it doesn't work for
me on my Thinkpad X301. There are side-effects.

The idea of the upstream patch is to mimic Windows:

> With 3.2.5 "ASPM disabled" means: When the ACPI says ASPM is
> disabled Linux will leave it alone, which is what Windows is
> doing. The assumption is that explicitly disabling ASPM is more
> problematic than doing nothing."

(Copied somewhere from LKML.)

In other words: my BIOS is broken. But it's broken for all Lenovo
Notebooks. So ...


_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 02-12-2012, 11:07 PM
Rob Kampen
 
Default Anyone already tried to backport the latest ASPM kernel patch to 6.2?

On 02/13/2012 12:39 PM, Michael Lampe wrote:
> Patrick Lists wrote:
>
>> Iirc to enable ASPM on Fedora the kernel must be booted with
>> pcie_aspm=force. Maybe you need to use that option too? For more info
>> see:
>> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux_aspm_solution&num =1
> That's no general solution. It may work, but (e.g.) it doesn't work for
> me on my Thinkpad X301. There are side-effects.
>
> The idea of the upstream patch is to mimic Windows:
>
> > With 3.2.5 "ASPM disabled" means: When the ACPI says ASPM is
> > disabled Linux will leave it alone, which is what Windows is
> > doing. The assumption is that explicitly disabling ASPM is more
> > problematic than doing nothing."
>
> (Copied somewhere from LKML.)
>
> In other words: my BIOS is broken. But it's broken for all Lenovo
> Notebooks. So ...
>
So for those of us that do not understand the intricacies of ASPM / BIOS
/ ACPI, how do we ensure we are getting the best (least) power consumption?
I have a new ASUS G73S with i7 8 core processor - running CentOS 6.2 and
loving it - no idea if this has or does not have ASPM support.
What do I need to do to test / check?
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 02-12-2012, 11:23 PM
Michael Lampe
 
Default Anyone already tried to backport the latest ASPM kernel patch to 6.2?

Rob Kampen wrote:

> So for those of us that do not understand the intricacies of ASPM / BIOS
> / ACPI, how do we ensure we are getting the best (least) power consumption?

Hey! I was asking for people who can help me backport the upstream fix!

> I have a new ASUS G73S with i7 8 core processor - running CentOS 6.2 and
> loving it - no idea if this has or does not have ASPM support.
> What do I need to do to test / check?

(Nothing. You have a fine battery!)

- dmesg | grep -i aspm
- lspci -vvv | grep -i aspm
- ...
- google, phoronix, etc.
- ...
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 02-13-2012, 12:09 AM
Michael Lampe
 
Default Anyone already tried to backport the latest ASPM kernel patch to 6.2?

Michael Lampe wrote:

>> Iirc to enable ASPM on Fedora the kernel must be booted with
>> pcie_aspm=force. Maybe you need to use that option too? For more info
>> see:
>> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux_aspm_solution&num =1
>
> That's no general solution. It may work, but (e.g.) it doesn't work for
> me on my Thinkpad X301. There are side-effects.
>
> The idea of the upstream patch is to mimic Windows:
>
> > With 3.2.5 "ASPM disabled" means: When the ACPI says ASPM is
> > disabled Linux will leave it alone, which is what Windows is
> > doing. The assumption is that explicitly disabling ASPM is more
> > problematic than doing nothing."
>
> (Copied somewhere from LKML.)

[addendum]

The point is: we are in a grey zone here. "pcie_aspm=force" is one
extreme, the current default behaviour being the other one (explicit
disabling!). The BIOS sets up something in-between and then says on
inquiry: "Never did I do anything! I'm not responsible!".

https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/2/7/273
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 02-13-2012, 05:25 PM
Michael Lampe
 
Default Anyone already tried to backport the latest ASPM kernel patch to 6.2?

Michael Lampe wrote:

> In other words: my BIOS is broken. But it's broken for all Lenovo
> Notebooks. So ...

It seems mine is particularly broken: The BIOS isn't even lying, it
realy disables ASPM!

That at least is my conclusion after looking at this

https://wiki.edubuntu.org/Kernel/PowerManagementASPM

and a closer inspection of 'lspci -vvv'.

The backported patch may be correct after all.

It may be a candiate for centosplus kernel.

If someone else wants to test: I can upload a kernel with this patch
applied.

-Michael
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 01:16 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org