Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mobile Users Beware: Linux Has Major Power Regression

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by evolution View Post

    Sw Specs:

    Kernel 1: 2.6.38.4-ck, BFS 401, CPUFreq governor 'ondemand' enabled by default
    Kernel 2: 2.6.28.5-lts-ck, BFS 401, CPUFreq governor 'ondemand' enabled by default
    Others: Catalyst 10.7, Xorg Server 1.8.2, OpenBox with Cairo-Compmgr, Dual Boot Arch Linux x86_64 + Windows 7
    The (in)famous 1 minute edit feature...

    Kernel 2: 2.6.35.12-lts-ck, BFS 401, CPUFreq governor 'ondemand' enabled by default

    Cheers

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by evolution View Post
      The (in)famous 1 minute edit feature...

      Kernel 2: 2.6.35.12-lts-ck, BFS 401, CPUFreq governor 'ondemand' enabled by default

      Cheers
      Ah okay, so on Arch. Good to see a non-Ubuntu user having problems (well, sorry for you) due to it being an upstream issue, but unfortunate as you won't be able to test my Debian packages.... If anyone else running Ubuntu that's experiencing this power problem, please email me (Michael at phoronix). I'm nearly done in analyzing this situation and I would like to have some kernels tested by some external people when ready.
      Michael Larabel
      http://www.michaellarabel.com/

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by airlied View Post
        Thats nearly as good a generalisation as the one about only clueless idiots post on forums...

        Dave.
        Well, Dave, I'd like to hear an actual substantive discussion on the merits of the issues rather than a simple ad hominem attack. Well, all right. I'll give in to the temptation. How's it like getting chewed out of Linus every merge cycle because the drm folks don't properly test their patches before submitting them?

        Here are the links from actual developers confirming the inherent bias towards enterprise usage scenarios.

        Ted Tso on the ext4 crash:
        https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+s...1?comments=all

        Patronizing attitude of I know it best and everyone who doesn't use software in the same way I do should learn what I do: "Personally, I test bleeding edge kernels all the time, and I've never had a problem simply because I usually know before I'm about to do something that might be dangerous, and so I just use the "sync" command in a terminal beforehand."

        There are usage scenarios that require high performance OpenGL (again, patronizing and refusing to acknowledge that others have different usage patterns): "The other thing that probably helps is that I also avoid hardware that requires proprietary video drivers like the plague. Why settle for machines that crash all the time? There are enough hardware options out there that don't require proprietary video drivers, I don't understand why folks would even consider buying cards that need binary-only video drivers."

        Indirectly this shows most of the developers are out of touch with the majority of users. Most consumers running Linux do not drive OpenBox or a command shell. They run a desktop environment. If developers are not even using and testing in such a common pattern, that will only lead to gotcha bugs when software is released: "I'll note that I use the GNOME desktop (which means the gnome panel, but I'm not a very major desktop user), and "find .[a-zA-Z]* -mtime 0" doesn't show a large number of files."

        Instead of fixing the software, blame the user: "Another solution is to make sure your system is reliable. :-) If you have your server in a proper data center, with a UPS, and you're not using any unreliable binary-only video drivers or network drivers, then your system shouldn't be randomly locking up or crashing"


        Con Kolivas on how development is increasingly being driven by needs of corporations: http://apcmag.com/interview_with_con..._is_boring.htm

        Now, this is only a natural state of affairs. Few hobbyist developers can afford to scratch their own itch, and the few that do care about the community's needs apparently are unceremoniously pushed aside when their proposed changes will get in the slightest way of the corporate agenda. After all, who's hiring developers of the kernel? Intel, IBM, Oracle, Red Hat. Of course their own needs will be met first. Ulrich Drepper said it best when someone made a request for changes on glibc. He asked "Do you sign my paycheques?"

        Relevant quotes from Con:
        "I even recall one bug report we tried to submit about this and one developer said he couldn't reproduce the problem on his quad-CPU 4GB RAM machine with 4 striped RAID array disks... think about the sort of hardware the average user would have had four years ago. Is it any wonder the desktop sucked so much?

        The developers were all developing for something that wasn't the desktop. They had all been employed by big name manufacturers who couldn't care less about the desktop (and still don't) but want their last 1% on their database benchmark or throughput benchmark or whatever."

        As to the individual on page 5 asking about why enterprise customers should care more about power consumption, the simple answer is that if you follow patches, you'll notice that the ones going in are more about supporting new features without bugs, and then about performance. Lastly are ancillary concerns about power consumption. Look at how slowly work on dynamic pm is going on radeon hardware.

        Linux power usage has been behind Windows and Mac OSX forever. Even if you use the argument of standards, If I install a generic version (unoptimized by the vendor) of Windows 7 and compare to the latest kernel straight out of the box running a very lightweight DM, I still get 30-60 min better idle runtime on the windows machine.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Michael View Post
          I've heard of desktop users reporting 1. increased power consumption and 2. increased wake-ups per second. Based upon what I think the problem is at this point, it will affect any type of system -- desktops included.

          Just change it from GRUB2. If you don't see the option screen, add a timeout to your boot confoguration.
          Let me give it a try though I don't remember if I ever see that prompt.

          btw, specs:

          i7-2600 (3.4GHz)
          ASRock H67M-GE (B3) BIOS 1.40
          16GB of DDR3
          a Seagate Barracuda ES (SATA) 750GB
          and a Seasonc 400W 80PLUS Gold
          Narwhal (11.04) 64bit server

          Currently it idles at 33-35W (per a kill-a-watt meter) and when I run mprime's torture test (#2 or #3), it maxes out at around 115W.
          I'll check which kernel it is and test it with other versions.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by MoFoQ View Post
            Let me give it a try though I don't remember if I ever see that prompt.

            btw, specs:

            i7-2600 (3.4GHz)
            ASRock H67M-GE (B3) BIOS 1.40
            16GB of DDR3
            a Seagate Barracuda ES (SATA) 750GB
            and a Seasonc 400W 80PLUS Gold
            Narwhal (11.04) 64bit server

            Currently it idles at 33-35W (per a kill-a-watt meter) and when I run mprime's torture test (#2 or #3), it maxes out at around 115W.
            I'll check which kernel it is and test it with other versions.

            On a clean install you won't ever see that prompt unless your boot fails. Add a new line of 'set timeout=5' to /boot/grub/grub.cfg as the easiest quick way to get the menu back.

            Okay, another Sandy Bridge system... I've seen reports earlier of the power issue under SNB too.
            Michael Larabel
            http://www.michaellarabel.com/

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Michael View Post
              On a clean install you won't ever see that prompt unless your boot fails. Add a new line of 'set timeout=5' to /boot/grub/grub.cfg as the easiest quick way to get the menu back.

              Okay, another Sandy Bridge system... I've seen reports earlier of the power issue under SNB too.
              Thx.

              on an interesting note, I was seeing 29W idle / 109-110W load with the B2 board but I don't remember what kernel it was.

              Comment


              • #52
                BTW, those users who have the power problem under Ubuntu, click the 'This bug affects me' on https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+s...ux/+bug/760131
                Michael Larabel
                http://www.michaellarabel.com/

                Comment


                • #53
                  Pentium-M, Debian. It's been a while my machine seems to be running hotter. I'm 100% sure about it, but I don't have any figures for the temperature sensor is hardwired to 2 states: 75 C (which means 'fine') and 85 C (which means 'bad'). I know. Anyway, I found out that some updates to laptop-mode and cpufreq-utils overwrote their config files and the CPU was set to 'ondemand' rather than 'conservative'. In any case, that wasn't the culprit. The fan still kicks in way more often than before. Before I installed 2.6.38? I can't tell, but I guess so from the article. Too bad I must've forgotten to enable detailed power statistics on my last compile, for I don't get the wakeups count in PowerTop.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    If all this is true this is a serious problem!! But even more serious would be the fact that quality tests done by linux foundation didn't see that regression during the release cycle (WTF ).

                    Increasing 10-20% power consumption on stable kernels on all linux machines around the world is a painful problem that should be avoided.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      anyways, I looked in the grub menu; only have 2.6.38-x's in it


                      wonder if there's a 2.6.37.6 .deb that can be used on 11.04

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Michael View Post
                        BTW, those users who have the power problem under Ubuntu, click the 'This bug affects me' on https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+s...ux/+bug/760131
                        If you look at the powertop output in that bug report, most of the interrupts are from the WIFI card, Chromium, and mouse / keyboard input.

                        https://launchpadlibrarian.net/69300044/hardcopy.0

                        Of course it's registering over 500 wakeups per second, it isn't idle.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Power problem does NOT appear to affect me.

                          My setup:

                          Software: Ubuntu 11.04 Beta 2 fresh install, updated as of 2011-04-25, using Nouveau and Unity in compositing mode.

                          Hardware: Compaq Presario V3010AU laptop (AMD Turion X2 1.6GHz, nVidia GeForce 6100 IGP, nVidia chipset, 2Gb DDR2-800, 100Gb 2.5" Seagate HD, purchased in 2006).

                          I haven't done battery tests yet, will do in the coming days, but under normal usage, CPU fan does not sound unusual compared to Ubuntu 10.10. Wakeups seem to be the same as Ubuntu 10.10.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            I've installed the 2.6.38 kernel available from Debian repositories and I don't see anything out of the blue in PowerTop either. Also, I installed 2.6.37 from snapshot.debian.org and I have to say that the fan still tends to run quite often too. I think I overlooked the influence of the weather: it's already getting warmer where I live, so probably the effectiveness of the cooling system is degraded. In any case, without proper measurements (and an isolated environment) I can't really tell whether there's something going on or not.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by yotambien View Post
                              In any case, without proper measurements (and an isolated environment) I can't really tell whether there's something going on or not.
                              That's why it's so dicey to find/report power regressions (or take reported ones seriously).

                              I only noticed because for a couple of months now I have collectd running (.deb available) and can look at load/sensors/other system info versus time.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Finally a reason to put my trusty old watt-meter through some use again...

                                Code:
                                kernel 2.6.38.4
                                idle: 50W  load: 95W
                                
                                kernel 2.6.37.6
                                idle: 45W  load: 87W
                                On a i720QM which is running much more quiet now that I've switched back to 2.6.37. So it wasn't the weather after all

                                Great find phoronix/Michael, tnx!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X