From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 27 18:45:33 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B57716A4CF for ; Wed, 27 Apr 2005 18:45:33 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail28.sea5.speakeasy.net (mail28.sea5.speakeasy.net [69.17.117.30]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAF7743D58 for ; Wed, 27 Apr 2005 18:45:32 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 3308 invoked from network); 27 Apr 2005 18:45:32 -0000 Received: from server.baldwin.cx ([216.27.160.63]) (envelope-sender )AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 27 Apr 2005 18:45:32 -0000 Received: from [10.50.41.242] (gw1.twc.weather.com [216.133.140.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by server.baldwin.cx (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j3RIiqae044824; Wed, 27 Apr 2005 14:45:26 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) From: John Baldwin To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 13:49:23 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 References: <20050414103154.GA11341@laptop.santcroos.net> <5e7c3d2084ff2460d6e48786defc8f33@xcllnt.net> <20050415173627.GQ4842@dan.emsphone.com> In-Reply-To: <20050415173627.GQ4842@dan.emsphone.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-6" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200504271349.24843.jhb@FreeBSD.org> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.7 required=4.2 tests=ALL_TRUSTED, SUBJ_HAS_UNIQ_ID,USER_IN_WHITELIST autolearn=failed version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on server.baldwin.cx cc: freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.org cc: Dan Nelson Subject: Re: Please test: ACPI-CA import 20050408 X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 18:45:33 -0000 On Friday 15 April 2005 01:36 pm, Dan Nelson wrote: > In the last episode (Apr 15), Marcel Moolenaar said: > > On Apr 15, 2005, at 9:28 AM, Mark Santcroos wrote: > > >On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 09:20:52AM -0700, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > > >>BTW: Is ACPICA getting slower? > > > > > > Might be. I don't have numbers on that. I guess we're still > > > focusing on functionality and not so much on speed. Do you have a > > > concrete area where you think we are loosing performance? > > > > No, not yet. It's just that there are 2 "dead" spots in the booting > > process of the plutos we have in the cluster and these "dead" spots > > appeared to be longer. I think there's a lot of AML interpretation > > going on during that time, but I might be wrong. > > What I have personally seen is a long delay in bus_alloc_resource() on > some older Dell machines (desktop and laptop, both under 500Mhz). If I > apply the attached patch, I see between 15 and 20 rows of identical > output, and each call to b_a_r takes a noticeable fraction of a second > (i.e. the cursor spends most of its time after an IRQ, not after a 'y' > or 'n'.) The delays probably add 45 seconds total to the boot time. > > Newer systems will just generate 4 or 5 lines total for the entire boot > process. Current doesn't use that version of the pci_link code anymore, so you should only see these delays on RELENG_5 now. -- John Baldwin <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org