From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 4 13:17:23 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E00D7A71; Sun, 4 Jan 2015 13:17:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from sola.nimnet.asn.au (paqi.nimnet.asn.au [115.70.110.159]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4A6DB175C; Sun, 4 Jan 2015 13:17:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sola.nimnet.asn.au (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id t04DHCcb022105; Mon, 5 Jan 2015 00:17:13 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from smithi@nimnet.asn.au) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2015 00:17:12 +1100 (EST) From: Ian Smith To: juris Subject: Re: [Bug 162859] [acpi] ACPI battery/acline monitoring partialy working (switching) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20150104234107.Q82172@sola.nimnet.asn.au> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2015 13:17:24 -0000 On Sat, 3 Jan 2015 11:45:05 +0000, bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org wrote: Please excuse this off-'zilla merely speculative response. No time, but I've spent (wasted?) some time chasing a couple of these outside the PR. > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=162859 > > --- Comment #14 from juris --- > Problem on /head/ branch is introduced with revision 216942. If true (in all cases) this is great news for those with a variety of HP laptops that have been experiencing partial - or in some cases complete after boot - failures in CMBAT monitoring since 9.0. And a Macbook Pro. So, reverting rev 216942 fixes it for you? On what FreeBSD version? If so, with scant comprehension of the code, questions that occur: a) did that revision fix some existing problem, the reverting of which might reestablish problem/s in other machines? jkim? b) what is it in various HP ACPI implementations that don't seem to be a reported problem on other hardware, particularly concerning EC handling? c) if this was wrong (for HPs), what would be right? (the hard one :) cheers, Ian From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 5 15:27:50 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47C376E1; Mon, 5 Jan 2015 15:27:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wg0-x234.google.com (mail-wg0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::234]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CAD836731E; Mon, 5 Jan 2015 15:27:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wg0-f52.google.com with SMTP id x12so27648532wgg.11; Mon, 05 Jan 2015 07:27:47 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=MS62colofIYJM6Ac+SPGIwhjGzqTorfnCzTl7D40ZE0=; b=MS58DUZSjMBVtEPBm2RQa+MzbNpn9H/dTl02GI+mPX3a/z5pFE4gJ5F1F9MP6Uma+A Dyj28bkJx1BMxIbKvQKTHtPquTYBAF1eExOfGPg7AAwNBDvo+YTTPzV4/ZlozfjiCpTZ rJlF1ZHogyDpv6dUwl/QAZN64FbHQBHZKmBnEjU7lj+7bWfw4hUjS3sRS14Z5NuQteej 7UcW+uVTu5O0cxfNCTthFGcuaXZqDUk4uZAlgxzqykOxKVaFGdgYhWeMxZCy3i9WPCbL 9nriEuz+gH/ntZLhFPq3ytjCzxfPfH774yuqSUviYaC9jbQ05i8cd+O30+Ql23H45K6V DWeg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.85.33 with SMTP id e1mr26272283wiz.61.1420471666956; Mon, 05 Jan 2015 07:27:46 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.194.221.131 with HTTP; Mon, 5 Jan 2015 07:27:46 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.194.221.131 with HTTP; Mon, 5 Jan 2015 07:27:46 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20150104234107.Q82172@sola.nimnet.asn.au> References: <20150104234107.Q82172@sola.nimnet.asn.au> Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2015 17:27:46 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Bug 162859] [acpi] ACPI battery/acline monitoring partialy working (switching) From: Juris Kaminskis To: Ian Smith Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.18-1 Cc: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2015 15:27:50 -0000 2015-01-04 15:17 GMT+02:00 Ian Smith : > > On Sat, 3 Jan 2015 11:45:05 +0000, bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org wrote: > > Please excuse this off-'zilla merely speculative response. No time, but > I've spent (wasted?) some time chasing a couple of these outside the PR. > > > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=162859 > > > > --- Comment #14 from juris --- > > Problem on /head/ branch is introduced with revision 216942. > > If true (in all cases) this is great news for those with a variety of HP > laptops that have been experiencing partial - or in some cases complete > after boot - failures in CMBAT monitoring since 9.0. And a Macbook Pro. > > So, reverting rev 216942 fixes it for you? On what FreeBSD version? I have compiled head branch revision 216941 and battery status via acpiconf works. When compiling from source revision 216942 acpiconf stops responding. I also tried to remove r216942 and compiled from source release 9.3, but there battery status was not working. Apparently there are more things than just one that breaks HP ACPI . > > > If so, with scant comprehension of the code, questions that occur: > > a) did that revision fix some existing problem, the reverting of which > might reestablish problem/s in other machines? jkim? > > b) what is it in various HP ACPI implementations that don't seem to be a > reported problem on other hardware, particularly concerning EC handling? > > c) if this was wrong (for HPs), what would be right? (the hard one :) > > cheers, Ian On Sat, 3 Jan 2015 11:45:05 +0000, bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org wrote: Please excuse this off-'zilla merely speculative response. No time, but I've spent (wasted?) some time chasing a couple of these outside the PR. > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=162859 > > --- Comment #14 from juris --- > Problem on /head/ branch is introduced with revision 216942. If true (in all cases) this is great news for those with a variety of HP laptops that have been experiencing partial - or in some cases complete after boot - failures in CMBAT monitoring since 9.0. And a Macbook Pro. So, reverting rev 216942 fixes it for you? On what FreeBSD version? If so, with scant comprehension of the code, questions that occur: a) did that revision fix some existing problem, the reverting of which might reestablish problem/s in other machines? jkim? b) what is it in various HP ACPI implementations that don't seem to be a reported problem on other hardware, particularly concerning EC handling? c) if this was wrong (for HPs), what would be right? (the hard one :) cheers, Ian From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 6 00:56:15 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C60151B for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2015 00:56:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.ignoranthack.me (ignoranthack.me [199.102.79.106]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4D29066207 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2015 00:56:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.12.76.163] (llnw-corp-src.phx2.llnw.com [69.164.56.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: sbruno@ignoranthack.me) by mail.ignoranthack.me (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 68057192A3B for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2015 00:56:14 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <54AB32AD.1070409@ignoranthack.me> Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2015 16:56:13 -0800 From: Sean Bruno Reply-To: sbruno@freebsd.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Subject: Haswell, i3, fail to acpi_throttle fail Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 00:56:15 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 acpi_throttle0: on cpu0 acpi_throttle0: P_CNT from P_BLK 0x1810 est0: on cpu0 acpi_throttle1: on cpu1 acpi_throttle1: failed to attach P_CNT device_attach: acpi_throttle1 attach returned 6 est1: on cpu1 acpi_throttle2: on cpu2 acpi_throttle2: failed to attach P_CNT device_attach: acpi_throttle2 attach returned 6 est2: on cpu2 acpi_throttle3: on cpu3 acpi_throttle3: failed to attach P_CNT device_attach: acpi_throttle3 attach returned 6 est3: on cpu3 The call to acpi_bus_alloc_gas() in acpi_throttle.c seems to be failing to attach. What should I be poking at here? sean -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQF8BAEBCgBmBQJUqzKGXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRCQUFENDYzMkU3MTIxREU4RDIwOTk3REQx MjAxRUZDQTFFNzI3RTY0AAoJEBIB78oecn5kzA8IAI3M5ZKFrHuu8zGihSj3elar qzYqjLdLnflBkxgzrs0e4evJofXfMcVlhsyR+DZv2CPij95lioQ0YpX+BY3oPzxJ oljC9BiI7TYJ2yTrepC3r0SSLosLGAxp8XIxdSfuGujUYXGKaI55r4wB/dB6z2TR ItVsjd5PDQYaQskEF7XWb3frDcnAH29F3mik/js76TvS2u11Wz0wCtBsWKHB8ByW Im98OUmHAtycMDyab1t3JNUa7EaIRccchzEQ5o+rKbp1KZcV8rcMsS/QchDWFSFN jywStS20C7B40T+W6/x6DuzImRrqxTOxsXubNMcSITbl4URj4ncshIPBFPvMz3o= =A10d -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 6 03:57:23 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 99576D02; Tue, 6 Jan 2015 03:57:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ig0-x22d.google.com (mail-ig0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::22d]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5F8AB2705; Tue, 6 Jan 2015 03:57:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ig0-f173.google.com with SMTP id r2so3624458igi.0; Mon, 05 Jan 2015 19:57:22 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=0lML7PtDBHct/IPvKiRbeHWUlyqZoIRHkhOtqY9ZG+g=; b=OwaHBWYqDDANFCncUj+0okWuyglbOQx+KLnxS89OYR7q0D12RnnWT5+/FG4JtbLoFD 7SoJigR9evAzm9n58dy7dAVP4r6bBMoCMq8Kfdb0ZTa9P24sZcIUPZgFc3U+3nJWptHL Q/ssjaUfF/PUckvrVQmr2nutKlC/N1ORNlEhzif9CL3r4B/nYdRhCVWax30krkMfzART J6woPr4fxPHhcwg6Bp7iAK+4JhIW15VN+0jrpzM0vnP4x97I5eEWjQndVkihmO57HaUB EsUrHFePYUM7GI0PGwWo7kYEC8+742aNbFEyFYFgYGc1Z6dc/+KdKDJrIVhOjxtJrTCH iAIg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.107.168.18 with SMTP id r18mr82997437ioe.76.1420516642639; Mon, 05 Jan 2015 19:57:22 -0800 (PST) Sender: kob6558@gmail.com Received: by 10.107.52.19 with HTTP; Mon, 5 Jan 2015 19:57:22 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <54AB32AD.1070409@ignoranthack.me> References: <54AB32AD.1070409@ignoranthack.me> Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2015 19:57:22 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: hoUEPzPm0hFGGvK_DxWtlIw3sY4 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Haswell, i3, fail to acpi_throttle fail From: Kevin Oberman To: Sean Bruno Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.18-1 Cc: "freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org" X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 03:57:23 -0000 On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 4:56 PM, Sean Bruno wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA512 > > acpi_throttle0: on cpu0 > acpi_throttle0: P_CNT from P_BLK 0x1810 > est0: on cpu0 > acpi_throttle1: on cpu1 > acpi_throttle1: failed to attach P_CNT > device_attach: acpi_throttle1 attach returned 6 > est1: on cpu1 > acpi_throttle2: on cpu2 > acpi_throttle2: failed to attach P_CNT > device_attach: acpi_throttle2 attach returned 6 > est2: on cpu2 > acpi_throttle3: on cpu3 > acpi_throttle3: failed to attach P_CNT > device_attach: acpi_throttle3 attach returned 6 > est3: on cpu3 > > > The call to acpi_bus_alloc_gas() in acpi_throttle.c seems to be failing > to attach. What should I be poking at here? > Excellent! Throttling is counter-productive and always has been. It's been at least 5 years since mav@ posted his excellent wiki article on power management which demonstrated the futility of throttling. More important, even if it was useful for power management, it has long since been superseded by TCC. Intel tried to make the purpose of TCC clear by the name: Thermal Control Circuit. So it is ineffective for power management and FreeBSD still tries to use it. Looks like the vendor broke ACPI so throttling won't work. Or, maybe, Intel simply removed it as unused legacy. Don't worry. Be happy! Make sure that hint.acpi_throttle.0.disabled=1 is set in /boot/loader.conf to disable it. I'd strongly urge that you also disable P4TCC with hint.p4tcc.0.disabled=1. It will trivially improve battery life and will seriously compromise performance if powerd is enabled. It can also cause hangs with elevated C-states on some systems. If you really want to improve battery life with minimal impact on performance, set both performance_cx_lowest and economy_cx_lowest to "Cmax" in rc,conf. No other technique is more effective in saving power than C-states. EST helps, too, but not nearly so much and with a greater impact on performance. If you have not read it, read the wiki article at https://duckduckgo.com/l/?kh=-1&uddg=https%3A%2F%2Fwiki.freebsd.org%2FTuningPowerConsumption -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer, Retired E-mail: rkoberman@gmail.com From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 6 04:09:37 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6F2371DE for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2015 04:09:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp1.ms.mff.cuni.cz (smtp1.ms.mff.cuni.cz [IPv6:2001:718:1e03:801::4]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0AD9A2826 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2015 04:09:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.20.12.2] ([194.108.204.138]) (authenticated) by smtp1.ms.mff.cuni.cz (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t0649WDJ091909 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=OK); Tue, 6 Jan 2015 05:09:33 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from dan@obluda.cz) Message-ID: <54AB5FFB.3090700@obluda.cz> Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 05:09:31 +0100 From: Dan Lukes User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:34.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/34.0 SeaMonkey/2.31 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kevin Oberman Subject: Re: Haswell, i3, fail to acpi_throttle fail References: <54AB32AD.1070409@ignoranthack.me> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 04:09:37 -0000 On 6.1.2015 4:57, Kevin Oberman wrote: >> acpi_throttle0: on cpu0 >> acpi_throttle0: P_CNT from P_BLK 0x1810 >> est0: on cpu0 >> acpi_throttle1: on cpu1 >> acpi_throttle1: failed to attach P_CNT >> device_attach: acpi_throttle1 attach returned 6 Attach to cpu0 successful, but failing on non-zero cpu's ? I never tried to analyze it, but I can deny it new issue. I never seen other result as far as I remember. Dan From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 6 04:44:10 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A4DC96D for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2015 04:44:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ig0-x22b.google.com (mail-ig0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::22b]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F2F7664D2B for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2015 04:44:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ig0-f171.google.com with SMTP id z20so3663807igj.4 for ; Mon, 05 Jan 2015 20:44:09 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=rXFkDrLLZGW/i6ybf4082YTzlvgEAhk68CXiBA5fPJE=; b=xR9X+J2OBs8JjZvHhk/cvevU89nKYL+5jcI/VRhS/xxEgF5u2+dliDvZ2PoJSXcanc 3EPegXHDWrecUV3N/qyrv55xJHf96Pvk7IfWEMbGBq7ldH2zEGEBXb4J6hvPm3jsoMmU YtaVUseT0q5S4iNtCWU1IdH4GqEk+mIWMr4pwidHS3HvD5MpiwOz5A4FPuP++Lynr6E2 6bH08vtvq4Q9Z10CYOcBD7Lwh2AQcpJICk20V8skrPidtFyC9BYV5I1txcGWsoq7YhhO Be7fPDpNomWWUcPNFd6E6BMmFco+06hEHqp4STlsPEHbH3C7saWkQzSaxzZwVQ7bBr7H JrJA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.42.205.197 with SMTP id fr5mr69481244icb.5.1420519449458; Mon, 05 Jan 2015 20:44:09 -0800 (PST) Sender: kob6558@gmail.com Received: by 10.107.52.19 with HTTP; Mon, 5 Jan 2015 20:44:09 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <54AB5FFB.3090700@obluda.cz> References: <54AB32AD.1070409@ignoranthack.me> <54AB5FFB.3090700@obluda.cz> Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2015 20:44:09 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: AHa0lKY0ACMFL-ALwRyIwpaLPsY Message-ID: Subject: Re: Haswell, i3, fail to acpi_throttle fail From: Kevin Oberman To: Dan Lukes Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.18-1 Cc: "freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org" X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 04:44:10 -0000 On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 8:09 PM, Dan Lukes wrote: > On 6.1.2015 4:57, Kevin Oberman wrote: > >> acpi_throttle0: on cpu0 >>> acpi_throttle0: P_CNT from P_BLK 0x1810 >>> est0: on cpu0 >>> acpi_throttle1: on cpu1 >>> acpi_throttle1: failed to attach P_CNT >>> device_attach: acpi_throttle1 attach returned 6 >>> >> > Attach to cpu0 successful, but failing on non-zero cpu's ? > > I never tried to analyze it, but I can deny it new issue. > > I never seen other result as far as I remember. > > Dan > I missed that it attached on cpu0. I think this is reality if throttling is done as it was in older CPUs. It required 3 physical pins on the CPU and predates (by some time) multi-core processors. Throttling in FreeBSD refers only to the old external form and is not related in any way to TCC, ST, or EST, all of which also do dynamic CPU Throttling, but in much more effective ways. Since throttling used physical pins, I have doubts that multi-core processors actually allocate three pins per CPU for a technique that is totally obsolete. It might be implemented as a compatibility thing and is really just TCC in disguise or they allocate three pins per chip and throttle all CPUs at once. If it is the latter, the behavior of only one CPU attaching is really more realistic than throttling per CPU. In either case, it is still best to disable it. -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer, Retired E-mail: rkoberman@gmail.com From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 6 21:41:07 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Received: from mx2.freebsd.org (mx2.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AE902A2C; Tue, 6 Jan 2015 21:41:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from hammer.pct.niksun.com (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206c::16:87]) by mx2.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D2FE2CFC; Tue, 6 Jan 2015 21:41:07 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <54AC5672.4060503@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 16:41:06 -0500 From: Jung-uk Kim User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kevin Oberman , Sean Bruno Subject: Re: Haswell, i3, fail to acpi_throttle fail References: <54AB32AD.1070409@ignoranthack.me> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: freebsd-acpi , Nathan Whitehorn X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 21:41:07 -0000 On 01/05/2015 22:57, Kevin Oberman wrote: > On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 4:56 PM, Sean Bruno > wrote: > >> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 >> >> acpi_throttle0: on cpu0 acpi_throttle0: >> P_CNT from P_BLK 0x1810 est0: > Control> on cpu0 acpi_throttle1: on cpu1 >> acpi_throttle1: failed to attach P_CNT device_attach: >> acpi_throttle1 attach returned 6 est1: > Frequency Control> on cpu1 acpi_throttle2: >> on cpu2 acpi_throttle2: failed to attach P_CNT device_attach: >> acpi_throttle2 attach returned 6 est2: > Frequency Control> on cpu2 acpi_throttle3: >> on cpu3 acpi_throttle3: failed to attach P_CNT device_attach: >> acpi_throttle3 attach returned 6 est3: > Frequency Control> on cpu3 >> >> >> The call to acpi_bus_alloc_gas() in acpi_throttle.c seems to be >> failing to attach. What should I be poking at here? >> > > Excellent! Throttling is counter-productive and always has been. > It's been at least 5 years since mav@ posted his excellent wiki > article on power management which demonstrated the futility of > throttling. More important, even if it was useful for power > management, it has long since been superseded by TCC. Intel tried > to make the purpose of TCC clear by the name: Thermal Control > Circuit. So it is ineffective for power management and FreeBSD > still tries to use it. Looks like the vendor broke ACPI so > throttling won't work. Or, maybe, Intel simply removed it as > unused legacy. > > Don't worry. Be happy! Make sure that > hint.acpi_throttle.0.disabled=1 is set in /boot/loader.conf to > disable it. I'd strongly urge that you also disable P4TCC with > hint.p4tcc.0.disabled=1. It will trivially improve battery life > and will seriously compromise performance if powerd is enabled. It > can also cause hangs with elevated C-states on some systems. FYI, acpi_throttle and tcc have been disabled by default for a while. https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/265329 I guess Nathan forgot to MFC this commit? Jung-uk Kim From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 6 22:09:04 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F2136448; Tue, 6 Jan 2015 22:09:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.ignoranthack.me (ignoranthack.me [199.102.79.106]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA37E6641E; Tue, 6 Jan 2015 22:09:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.12.76.127] (llnw-corp-src.phx2.llnw.com [69.164.56.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: sbruno@ignoranthack.me) by mail.ignoranthack.me (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3C845192A3B; Tue, 6 Jan 2015 22:09:02 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <54AC5CF6.1040500@ignoranthack.me> Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 14:08:54 -0800 From: Sean Bruno Reply-To: sbruno@freebsd.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jung-uk Kim , Kevin Oberman Subject: Re: Haswell, i3, fail to acpi_throttle fail References: <54AB32AD.1070409@ignoranthack.me> <54AC5672.4060503@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <54AC5672.4060503@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-acpi , Nathan Whitehorn X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 22:09:04 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 01/06/15 13:41, Jung-uk Kim wrote: > On 01/05/2015 22:57, Kevin Oberman wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 4:56 PM, Sean Bruno >> wrote: >> >>> >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 >>> >>> acpi_throttle0: on cpu0 acpi_throttle0: >>> P_CNT from P_BLK 0x1810 est0: >> Control> on cpu0 acpi_throttle1: on cpu1 >>> acpi_throttle1: failed to attach P_CNT device_attach: >>> acpi_throttle1 attach returned 6 est1: >> Frequency Control> on cpu1 acpi_throttle2: >> Throttling> on cpu2 acpi_throttle2: failed to attach P_CNT >>> device_attach: acpi_throttle2 attach returned 6 est2: >> SpeedStep Frequency Control> on cpu2 acpi_throttle3: >> Throttling> on cpu3 acpi_throttle3: failed to attach P_CNT >>> device_attach: acpi_throttle3 attach returned 6 est3: >> SpeedStep Frequency Control> on cpu3 >>> >>> >>> The call to acpi_bus_alloc_gas() in acpi_throttle.c seems to be >>> failing to attach. What should I be poking at here? >>> >> >> Excellent! Throttling is counter-productive and always has been. >> It's been at least 5 years since mav@ posted his excellent wiki >> article on power management which demonstrated the futility of >> throttling. More important, even if it was useful for power >> management, it has long since been superseded by TCC. Intel >> tried to make the purpose of TCC clear by the name: Thermal >> Control Circuit. So it is ineffective for power management and >> FreeBSD still tries to use it. Looks like the vendor broke ACPI >> so throttling won't work. Or, maybe, Intel simply removed it as >> unused legacy. >> >> Don't worry. Be happy! Make sure that >> hint.acpi_throttle.0.disabled=1 is set in /boot/loader.conf to >> disable it. I'd strongly urge that you also disable P4TCC with >> hint.p4tcc.0.disabled=1. It will trivially improve battery life >> and will seriously compromise performance if powerd is enabled. >> It can also cause hangs with elevated C-states on some systems. > > FYI, acpi_throttle and tcc have been disabled by default for a > while. > > https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/265329 > > I guess Nathan forgot to MFC this commit? > > Jung-uk Kim > > Well, I'm running -current. I don't know, for my case, that an MFC is correct. Is it a bug that this stuff is appearing at all? sean FreeBSD bruno 11.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 11.0-CURRENT #11 r276355M: Mon Jan 5 17:52:37 PST 2015 sbruno@bruno:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/BRUNO amd64 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQF8BAEBCgBmBQJUrFzzXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRCQUFENDYzMkU3MTIxREU4RDIwOTk3REQx MjAxRUZDQTFFNzI3RTY0AAoJEBIB78oecn5kZtgIANLbUDUly1KJgls/GHNGXuHE WdruuhibrIfHZuoaFSKtodL4SHtqKljfzTxk61ZazOqDixkhaMpyiDa6u23RxyGN 92PeBFmxBkVgdrPwaShOtGiPaREomfMbyB989/avBIBvbUHzKYyZ+PFxbf4In5M7 03ZcLoe7S9Y1Y6MMJkYJS4le80dIBM8XbGuz4qpC6Hq7ncBZPlxDDEtHqKbX0lCF 9izMAl+Ax42LbbqL7GsxXvNeE668AU2gbBOCsgX59MgdNieqm2q9mzq9t0+/DW9s vR7vQkJALhfrJAObm1i4of85lI+iEBt3rt9xWDALSjlixBL9eXDf6OF6ZrmjMQM= =oaxO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 6 22:48:04 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Received: from mx2.freebsd.org (mx2.freebsd.org [8.8.178.116]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8321EB45; Tue, 6 Jan 2015 22:48:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from hammer.pct.niksun.com (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206c::16:87]) by mx2.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2120A1F14; Tue, 6 Jan 2015 22:48:04 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <54AC6623.7010009@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 17:48:03 -0500 From: Jung-uk Kim User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: sbruno@freebsd.org, Kevin Oberman Subject: Re: Haswell, i3, fail to acpi_throttle fail References: <54AB32AD.1070409@ignoranthack.me> <54AC5672.4060503@FreeBSD.org> <54AC5CF6.1040500@ignoranthack.me> In-Reply-To: <54AC5CF6.1040500@ignoranthack.me> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: freebsd-acpi , Nathan Whitehorn X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 22:48:04 -0000 On 01/06/2015 17:08, Sean Bruno wrote: > On 01/06/15 13:41, Jung-uk Kim wrote: >> On 01/05/2015 22:57, Kevin Oberman wrote: >>> On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 4:56 PM, Sean Bruno >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 >>>> >>>> acpi_throttle0: on cpu0 acpi_throttle0: >>>> P_CNT from P_BLK 0x1810 est0: >>> Control> on cpu0 acpi_throttle1: on >>>> cpu1 acpi_throttle1: failed to attach P_CNT device_attach: >>>> acpi_throttle1 attach returned 6 est1: >>> Frequency Control> on cpu1 acpi_throttle2: >>> Throttling> on cpu2 acpi_throttle2: failed to attach P_CNT >>>> device_attach: acpi_throttle2 attach returned 6 est2: >>>> on cpu2 >>>> acpi_throttle3: on cpu3 acpi_throttle3: >>>> failed to attach P_CNT device_attach: acpi_throttle3 attach >>>> returned 6 est3: on >>>> cpu3 >>>> >>>> >>>> The call to acpi_bus_alloc_gas() in acpi_throttle.c seems to >>>> be failing to attach. What should I be poking at here? >>>> >>> >>> Excellent! Throttling is counter-productive and always has >>> been. It's been at least 5 years since mav@ posted his >>> excellent wiki article on power management which demonstrated >>> the futility of throttling. More important, even if it was >>> useful for power management, it has long since been superseded >>> by TCC. Intel tried to make the purpose of TCC clear by the >>> name: Thermal Control Circuit. So it is ineffective for power >>> management and FreeBSD still tries to use it. Looks like the >>> vendor broke ACPI so throttling won't work. Or, maybe, Intel >>> simply removed it as unused legacy. >>> >>> Don't worry. Be happy! Make sure that >>> hint.acpi_throttle.0.disabled=1 is set in /boot/loader.conf to >>> disable it. I'd strongly urge that you also disable P4TCC with >>> hint.p4tcc.0.disabled=1. It will trivially improve battery >>> life and will seriously compromise performance if powerd is >>> enabled. It can also cause hangs with elevated C-states on some >>> systems. > >> FYI, acpi_throttle and tcc have been disabled by default for a >> while. > >> https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/265329 > >> I guess Nathan forgot to MFC this commit? > >> Jung-uk Kim > > Well, I'm running -current. I don't know, for my case, that an MFC > is correct. Is it a bug that this stuff is appearing at all? I think you need to merge the file to /boot/device.hints manually. Jung-uk Kim From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 7 18:23:54 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7C05F23E; Wed, 7 Jan 2015 18:23:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wi0-x230.google.com (mail-wi0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::230]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0531D64474; Wed, 7 Jan 2015 18:23:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wi0-f176.google.com with SMTP id ex7so8106702wid.9; Wed, 07 Jan 2015 10:23:52 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=0dRWZYXrlYZSxXcCh9GVr8urJXuOtHGLQ7/RG8S5VS8=; b=QSjibXg6VWhvFnH+NXB9e1hH3H0CDcx/wUYfUcvcxaqMBZrVg9lUoOS04AghEdOpvq vqIMjHt4j6K34J6R2wYubXp0+CJjNSGMQlufKMXt9DORqwehQdecIPmLQ/wdwZmeb/ha Rk5yK+k3hgL86o+bhWiVRIIWA1b/qOGQ8Regb8tj2hTUcM3WFNjmShpc8U2CbLpKPlVj HuqUW9iPvYIy1guD3olLbboVDOhiXvTtMzgyPjqPkh7RmmqnNEL/IJXgw70NBRCqj3tf Io3Z1bQ9qq7QjUc7S5dUbniDtfsy4fR1NEuCFeUVv7wG6JSR2pEd/sD+5JMfvIUVKz2H YP5w== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.98.197 with SMTP id ek5mr51026290wib.35.1420655031256; Wed, 07 Jan 2015 10:23:51 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.194.221.131 with HTTP; Wed, 7 Jan 2015 10:23:51 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20150104234107.Q82172@sola.nimnet.asn.au> Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 20:23:51 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Bug 162859] [acpi] ACPI battery/acline monitoring partialy working (switching) From: Juris Kaminskis To: Ian Smith Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.18-1 Cc: "freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org" X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 18:23:54 -0000 2015-01-05 17:27 GMT+02:00 Juris Kaminskis : > > 2015-01-04 15:17 GMT+02:00 Ian Smith : > > > > On Sat, 3 Jan 2015 11:45:05 +0000, bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org wrote: > > > > Please excuse this off-'zilla merely speculative response. No time, but > > I've spent (wasted?) some time chasing a couple of these outside the PR. > > > > > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=162859 > > > > > > --- Comment #14 from juris --- > > > Problem on /head/ branch is introduced with revision 216942. > > > > If true (in all cases) this is great news for those with a variety of HP > > laptops that have been experiencing partial - or in some cases complete > > after boot - failures in CMBAT monitoring since 9.0. And a Macbook Pro. > > > > So, reverting rev 216942 fixes it for you? On what FreeBSD version? > > I have compiled head branch revision 216941 and battery status via > acpiconf works. When compiling from source revision 216942 acpiconf stops > responding. I also tried to remove r216942 and compiled from source release > 9.3, but there battery status was not working. Apparently there are more > things than just one that breaks HP ACPI . > Sorry for my previous email that was confusing. I did not revert r216941 when compiled release 9.3. So when I did that, battery status works. I also compiled release 10.1 with excluding r216942, and battery status works. So this single change for some reason creates problem for HP laptops. > > > > > > If so, with scant comprehension of the code, questions that occur: > > > > a) did that revision fix some existing problem, the reverting of which > > might reestablish problem/s in other machines? jkim? > > > > b) what is it in various HP ACPI implementations that don't seem to be a > > reported problem on other hardware, particularly concerning EC handling? > > > > c) if this was wrong (for HPs), what would be right? (the hard one :) > > > > cheers, Ian > > On Sat, 3 Jan 2015 11:45:05 +0000, bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org wrote: > > Please excuse this off-'zilla merely speculative response. No time, but > I've spent (wasted?) some time chasing a couple of these outside the PR. > > > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=162859 > > > > --- Comment #14 from juris --- > > Problem on /head/ branch is introduced with revision 216942. > > If true (in all cases) this is great news for those with a variety of HP > laptops that have been experiencing partial - or in some cases complete > after boot - failures in CMBAT monitoring since 9.0. And a Macbook Pro. > > So, reverting rev 216942 fixes it for you? On what FreeBSD version? > > If so, with scant comprehension of the code, questions that occur: > > a) did that revision fix some existing problem, the reverting of which > might reestablish problem/s in other machines? jkim? > > b) what is it in various HP ACPI implementations that don't seem to be a > reported problem on other hardware, particularly concerning EC handling? > > c) if this was wrong (for HPs), what would be right? (the hard one :) > > cheers, Ian > From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 7 18:46:41 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5EEA3B92 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2015 18:46:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 45E2C666A0 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2015 18:46:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t07IkfJn018912 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2015 18:46:41 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 162859] [acpi] ACPI battery/acline monitoring partialy working (switching) Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 18:46:40 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.0-PRERELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: juris.kaminskis@gmail.com X-Bugzilla-Status: In Progress X-Bugzilla-Priority: Normal X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: attachments.created Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 18:46:41 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=162859 --- Comment #15 from juris --- Created attachment 151472 --> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=151472&action=edit Patch for release 10.1 Patch removes small change introduced on head branch, revision 216942 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 8 10:30:22 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3660B46E; Thu, 8 Jan 2015 10:30:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from sola.nimnet.asn.au (paqi.nimnet.asn.au [115.70.110.159]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7CEC3AE2; Thu, 8 Jan 2015 10:30:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sola.nimnet.asn.au (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id t08AUAEF009361; Thu, 8 Jan 2015 21:30:10 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from smithi@nimnet.asn.au) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 21:30:10 +1100 (EST) From: Ian Smith To: Juris Kaminskis Subject: Re: [Bug 162859] [acpi] ACPI battery/acline monitoring partialy working (switching) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20150108205333.B82172@sola.nimnet.asn.au> References: <20150104234107.Q82172@sola.nimnet.asn.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 10:30:22 -0000 On Wed, 7 Jan 2015 20:23:51 +0200, Juris Kaminskis wrote: > 2015-01-05 17:27 GMT+02:00 Juris Kaminskis : > > 2015-01-04 15:17 GMT+02:00 Ian Smith : > > > > > > On Sat, 3 Jan 2015 11:45:05 +0000, bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org wrote: > > > > > > Please excuse this off-'zilla merely speculative response. No time, but > > > I've spent (wasted?) some time chasing a couple of these outside the PR. > > > > > > > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=162859 > > > > > > > > --- Comment #14 from juris --- > > > > Problem on /head/ branch is introduced with revision 216942. > > > > > > If true (in all cases) this is great news for those with a variety of HP > > > laptops that have been experiencing partial - or in some cases complete > > > after boot - failures in CMBAT monitoring since 9.0. And a Macbook Pro. > > > > > > So, reverting rev 216942 fixes it for you? On what FreeBSD version? > > > > I have compiled head branch revision 216941 and battery status via > > acpiconf works. When compiling from source revision 216942 acpiconf stops > > responding. I also tried to remove r216942 and compiled from source release > > 9.3, but there battery status was not working. Apparently there are more > > things than just one that breaks HP ACPI . > Sorry for my previous email that was confusing. I did not revert r216941 > when compiled release 9.3. So when I did that, battery status works. I also > compiled release 10.1 with excluding r216942, and battery status works. So > this single change for some reason creates problem for HP laptops. So it seems; I'll post a proper response based on the text above and my musings below to bugzilla .. such details are important, and I should have been game to speculate there originally, my apologies to all. It's important to note that this PR was originally filed on 2011-11-24 21:50 UTC by msuszko, at version 9.0-PRERELEASE. revision 216942 was committed to head on Jan 4 00:10:29 2011 UTC (4 years ago) by jkim, while head was 9-CURRENT, and hasn't changed since. It seems fortunate, for HP laptops anyway, that this was not apparently merged back to 8.x. cheers, Ian > > > If so, with scant comprehension of the code, questions that occur: > > > > > > a) did that revision fix some existing problem, the reverting of which > > > might reestablish problem/s in other machines? jkim? > > > > > > b) what is it in various HP ACPI implementations that don't seem to be a > > > reported problem on other hardware, particularly concerning EC handling? > > > > > > c) if this was wrong (for HPs), what would be right? (the hard one :) > > > > > > cheers, Ian From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 8 12:01:03 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD87C1F1 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2015 12:01:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from sola.nimnet.asn.au (paqi.nimnet.asn.au [115.70.110.159]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1492267B for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2015 12:01:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sola.nimnet.asn.au (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id t08C0xpA012452; Thu, 8 Jan 2015 23:00:59 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from smithi@nimnet.asn.au) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 23:00:59 +1100 (EST) From: Ian Smith To: Juris Kaminskis Subject: Re: [Bug 162859] [acpi] ACPI battery/acline monitoring partialy working (switching) In-Reply-To: <20150108205333.B82172@sola.nimnet.asn.au> Message-ID: <20150108224317.G82172@sola.nimnet.asn.au> References: <20150104234107.Q82172@sola.nimnet.asn.au> <20150108205333.B82172@sola.nimnet.asn.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 12:01:03 -0000 On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 21:30:10 +1100, Ian Smith wrote: > So it seems; I'll post a proper response based on the text above and my > musings below to bugzilla .. such details are important, and I should > have been game to speculate there originally, my apologies to all. Argh. After spending 10 minutes formatting a response to juris' message on bugzilla - yes, logged in - I couldn't find any sort of 'submit' button anywhere to actually post my message? So I went to mark and copy my response and somehow lost the contents in the process. Subsequent attempts to even get back to the bug were met with "Data Transfer Interrupted The connection to bugs.freebsd.org has terminated unexpectedly. Some data may have been transferred." after first warning of transferring to a non-encrypted page. I'd also added myself as a cc but again there seemed no way to submit any of it. Might my old Seamonkey lack some javascript thingy bugzilla needs? I'll try again later, but can someone whack me with a clue please? Confused, Ian From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 8 14:39:18 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CCFDA538 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2015 14:39:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B3A7E911 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2015 14:39:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t08EdIpc049190 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2015 14:39:18 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 162859] [acpi] ACPI battery/acline monitoring partialy working (switching) Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 14:39:18 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.0-PRERELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: anders.bolt.evensen@gmail.com X-Bugzilla-Status: In Progress X-Bugzilla-Priority: Normal X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 14:39:18 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=162859 --- Comment #16 from Anders Bolt-Evensen --- I've tested your patch, and I can confirm that it works on both 10.1 and 11.0 (-CURRENT). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 9 18:39:39 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 268ABBD8; Fri, 9 Jan 2015 18:39:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wi0-x22e.google.com (mail-wi0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::22e]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AA6ECC05; Fri, 9 Jan 2015 18:39:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wi0-f174.google.com with SMTP id h11so4085632wiw.1; Fri, 09 Jan 2015 10:39:37 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=XjycvC+22Y4ln+n4ukpSkmPYEPtx81E0VI4I8LFOOHQ=; b=zA5NZVWdD77s08Kp086BC/N36VCUNj8bTHqzXMdjoyjc12ClLSJN5Sd7Ruuk0kvWZw szKI/ewOUYYtz+d/ewYUZOv1urzoGFV9ID/cGB4qbpIoEozWCVZvlfwTBOoN67eK78ky G5Z2Mb2C8oRJEu3IbEiY2M8SemQ6I4Z+yR+FVCVfe12E6Dt0bxnyWRoVheIX21WZFTLO EXixTs51JYD/1ebk3WTcxJBDdP3mHp0LSdFigafGQe7bArIBZGXBCZudGdSIyBzf/pCo eUDJmj+ycMEbTeaucQL2SU52mRnhcryYhUWPl7UA6BwZD5AU11MobIFD9wJdduTxO8x1 WKzw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.108.9 with SMTP id hg9mr34418312wjb.68.1420828776975; Fri, 09 Jan 2015 10:39:36 -0800 (PST) Sender: adrian.chadd@gmail.com Received: by 10.216.41.136 with HTTP; Fri, 9 Jan 2015 10:39:36 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20150104234107.Q82172@sola.nimnet.asn.au> Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2015 10:39:36 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: HjOO9HZ6TwL3Rn52t2PIpQNyNiE Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Bug 162859] [acpi] ACPI battery/acline monitoring partialy working (switching) From: Adrian Chadd To: Juris Kaminskis , Jung-uk Kim Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: "freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org" , Ian Smith X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2015 18:39:39 -0000 Hm, +jkim. Any ideas? On 7 January 2015 at 10:23, Juris Kaminskis wrote: > 2015-01-05 17:27 GMT+02:00 Juris Kaminskis : > >> >> 2015-01-04 15:17 GMT+02:00 Ian Smith : >> > >> > On Sat, 3 Jan 2015 11:45:05 +0000, bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org wrote: >> > >> > Please excuse this off-'zilla merely speculative response. No time, but >> > I've spent (wasted?) some time chasing a couple of these outside the PR. >> > >> > > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=162859 >> > > >> > > --- Comment #14 from juris --- >> > > Problem on /head/ branch is introduced with revision 216942. >> > >> > If true (in all cases) this is great news for those with a variety of HP >> > laptops that have been experiencing partial - or in some cases complete >> > after boot - failures in CMBAT monitoring since 9.0. And a Macbook Pro. >> > >> > So, reverting rev 216942 fixes it for you? On what FreeBSD version? >> >> I have compiled head branch revision 216941 and battery status via >> acpiconf works. When compiling from source revision 216942 acpiconf stops >> responding. I also tried to remove r216942 and compiled from source release >> 9.3, but there battery status was not working. Apparently there are more >> things than just one that breaks HP ACPI . >> > > Sorry for my previous email that was confusing. I did not revert r216941 > when compiled release 9.3. So when I did that, battery status works. I also > compiled release 10.1 with excluding r216942, and battery status works. So > this single change for some reason creates problem for HP laptops. > >> > >> > >> > If so, with scant comprehension of the code, questions that occur: >> > >> > a) did that revision fix some existing problem, the reverting of which >> > might reestablish problem/s in other machines? jkim? >> > >> > b) what is it in various HP ACPI implementations that don't seem to be a >> > reported problem on other hardware, particularly concerning EC handling? >> > >> > c) if this was wrong (for HPs), what would be right? (the hard one :) >> > >> > cheers, Ian >> >> On Sat, 3 Jan 2015 11:45:05 +0000, bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org wrote: >> >> Please excuse this off-'zilla merely speculative response. No time, but >> I've spent (wasted?) some time chasing a couple of these outside the PR. >> >> > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=162859 >> > >> > --- Comment #14 from juris --- >> > Problem on /head/ branch is introduced with revision 216942. >> >> If true (in all cases) this is great news for those with a variety of HP >> laptops that have been experiencing partial - or in some cases complete >> after boot - failures in CMBAT monitoring since 9.0. And a Macbook Pro. >> >> So, reverting rev 216942 fixes it for you? On what FreeBSD version? >> >> If so, with scant comprehension of the code, questions that occur: >> >> a) did that revision fix some existing problem, the reverting of which >> might reestablish problem/s in other machines? jkim? >> >> b) what is it in various HP ACPI implementations that don't seem to be a >> reported problem on other hardware, particularly concerning EC handling? >> >> c) if this was wrong (for HPs), what would be right? (the hard one :) >> >> cheers, Ian >> > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-acpi > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-acpi-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"