[arch-general] high CPU temperature with 2.6.32

[Dimitrios Apostolou]

On Wed, 6 Jan 2010, Marti Raudsepp wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 11:07 PM, Dimitrios Apostolou <jimis at gmx.net> wrote:
>> Using powertop I can see more than 100K wakeups/s (extra_timer_interrupt
>> is first on the list but I think it's irrelevant since it only shows about
>> 100 wakeups), and the CPU is not going into C2 mode at all. Strangely
>> however the cpu is 99% idle, and top doesn't show "system" or "user" cpu
>> usage.
>
> This sounds bad. Let me get this straight. "Wakeups-from-idle per
> second" shows 100 000, but no large numbers show up under "Top causes
> for wakeups"?
>
> Can you post the contents of your /proc/interrupts and
> /proc/timer_stats twice, taken within a few seconds difference?

cat /proc/timer_stats /proc/interrupts && echo && echo && sleep 2 && cat \
/proc/timer_stats /proc/interrupts

Timer Stats Version: v0.2
Sample period: 0.000 s
0 total events
            CPU0
   0:      79154    XT-PIC-XT        timer
   1:       1621    XT-PIC-XT        i8042
   2:          0    XT-PIC-XT        cascade
   3:          2    XT-PIC-XT
   4:          3    XT-PIC-XT
   5:          6    XT-PIC-XT        au8810
   6:          5    XT-PIC-XT        floppy
   7:          0    XT-PIC-XT        parport0
   8:          4    XT-PIC-XT        rtc0
   9:          4    XT-PIC-XT        acpi
  10:          2    XT-PIC-XT
  11:      45870    XT-PIC-XT        yenta, yenta, uhci_hcd:usb1
  12:      82960    XT-PIC-XT        i8042
  14:      15309    XT-PIC-XT        ata_piix
  15:          0    XT-PIC-XT        ata_piix
NMI:          0   Non-maskable interrupts
LOC:          0   Local timer interrupts
SPU:          0   Spurious interrupts
PMI:          0   Performance monitoring interrupts
PND:          0   Performance pending work
RES:          0   Rescheduling interrupts
CAL:          0   Function call interrupts
TLB:          0   TLB shootdowns
TRM:          0   Thermal event interrupts
THR:          0   Threshold APIC interrupts
MCE:          0   Machine check exceptions
MCP:          4   Machine check polls
ERR:          0
MIS:          0


Timer Stats Version: v0.2
Sample period: 0.000 s
0 total events
            CPU0
   0:      79271    XT-PIC-XT        timer
   1:       1622    XT-PIC-XT        i8042
   2:          0    XT-PIC-XT        cascade
   3:          2    XT-PIC-XT
   4:          3    XT-PIC-XT
   5:          6    XT-PIC-XT        au8810
   6:          5    XT-PIC-XT        floppy
   7:          0    XT-PIC-XT        parport0
   8:          4    XT-PIC-XT        rtc0
   9:          4    XT-PIC-XT        acpi
  10:          2    XT-PIC-XT
  11:      45914    XT-PIC-XT        yenta, yenta, uhci_hcd:usb1
  12:      82960    XT-PIC-XT        i8042
  14:      15330    XT-PIC-XT        ata_piix
  15:          0    XT-PIC-XT        ata_piix
NMI:          0   Non-maskable interrupts
LOC:          0   Local timer interrupts
SPU:          0   Spurious interrupts
PMI:          0   Performance monitoring interrupts
PND:          0   Performance pending work
RES:          0   Rescheduling interrupts
CAL:          0   Function call interrupts
TLB:          0   TLB shootdowns
TRM:          0   Thermal event interrupts
THR:          0   Threshold APIC interrupts
MCE:          0   Machine check exceptions
MCP:          4   Machine check polls
ERR:          0
MIS:          0


I have already compiled a minimal 2.6.31 and a 2.6.32 kernel and the 
problem seems to be a regression introduced in the former. So I'm trying 
to find time for a git bisection... Any other ideas?


Dimitris


>
> Marti
>