From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Sep  2 04:47:48 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3804843;
 Mon,  2 Sep 2013 04:47:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from avg@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from citadel.icyb.net.ua (citadel.icyb.net.ua [212.40.38.140])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDE9D2D18;
 Mon,  2 Sep 2013 04:47:46 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from porto.starpoint.kiev.ua (porto-e.starpoint.kiev.ua
 [212.40.38.100])
 by citadel.icyb.net.ua (8.8.8p3/ICyb-2.3exp) with ESMTP id HAA15790;
 Mon, 02 Sep 2013 07:47:44 +0300 (EEST)
 (envelope-from avg@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1])
 by porto.starpoint.kiev.ua with esmtp (Exim 4.34 (FreeBSD))
 id 1VGM3E-000MHz-Lt; Mon, 02 Sep 2013 07:47:44 +0300
Message-ID: <52241838.8020906@FreeBSD.org>
Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2013 07:46:48 +0300
From: Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64;
 rv:17.0) Gecko/20130810 Thunderbird/17.0.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: 9.2-RC3 - suspend/resume causes slow system performance
References: <CALRn2n_2tUc0vPCFpgmAjYRm1=7KB5sA3A+xQqcc=ye-S1-0LA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJ-Vmom970ZBLPLWWTomkKtX1w-Fi3cj5qva1_ODcx22nqEXfA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALRn2n9G1+BS8KVUc_RFZj-snM3FVJvsEEcnWqv-GF82=CqS6Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJ-VmomWMhQNU1w0eWdwrKYz2fuZ5xZimgxQWUEkPqaQcgYkjw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALRn2n_e2Uu4Y2aHUSP=6_aQDPeCk_OkrCxiFWaD0BxmbgP4-A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJ-VmokesYVnYJUnNgULKwL-wqb_-SqqYi=3KUSCGbHNVgOOUw@mail.gmail.com>
 <5222E19C.9040402@FreeBSD.org>
 <CAJ-VmokHyXaxZTb-3Bpp19Go+sW=ms0Zh0WAMB7sD1JSX6HdUw@mail.gmail.com>
 <5223B313.9060708@FreeBSD.org>
 <CAJ-VmomweLyjXnBHjp=Nrs3P4n7UNF1bCV_N41RYJQqGLpg9hQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <5223B9C3.2070508@FreeBSD.org>
 <CAJ-Vmo=+WPXLDCpMu-i1MrjEtn4mA04kDx96C2t0-xPvC-cP9w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJ-Vmo=+WPXLDCpMu-i1MrjEtn4mA04kDx96C2t0-xPvC-cP9w@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org" <freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.org>,
 FreeBSD Stable Mailing List <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org>,
 Mike Harding <mvharding@gmail.com>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-stable>,
 <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
 <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2013 04:47:48 -0000

on 02/09/2013 01:21 Adrian Chadd said the following:
> .. well, when is that pointer NULL?

It's never NULL.  But that is besides the point as we are talking about a
different check.

*     if (is_idle_disabled(sc)) {*
-       ACPI_ENABLE_IRQS();
+       acpi_cpu_c1();

> It looks like it's supposed to be NULL for
> one pair of the two HT CPUs?
> 
> Are you taking the whole core into an ACPI idle state if one of two logical CPUs
> representing a core is going idle?

-- 
Andriy Gapon