LinuxQuestions.org
Latest LQ Deal: Latest LQ Deals
Home Forums Tutorials Articles Register
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 03-13-2011, 04:12 AM   #1
solarfields
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2006
Location: slackalaxy.com
Distribution: Slackware, CRUX
Posts: 1,449

Rep: Reputation: 997Reputation: 997Reputation: 997Reputation: 997Reputation: 997Reputation: 997Reputation: 997Reputation: 997
tickless kernel, 300 Hz timer


Hi guys,

I am going to describe a problem I had and how I solved it, in the hope of being helpful to someone with a similar issue.

I have a laptop with a Mobile AMD Sempron(tm) Processor 3100+. In versions of Slackware 13.0 and 13.1, the computer behaved as if there was a constant CPU load. The fan was really noisy and the computer heated a lot, usually around 65 C on an idle system. As a comparison, it used to be around 52 C before in Slackware 12.2.

What I noticed was that when I run powertop, I get the following:

Top causes for wakeups:
89.4% (1001.0) <kernel core> : hrtimer_start_range_ns (tick_sched_timer)

What I did was to recompile the kernel, using config-vmlinuz-generic-2.6.33.4 with the following changes:

“Processor type and features” > “Timer Frequency” > “300 Hz” (it was set to 1000)
“Processor type and features” > “Tickless System (Dynamic Ticks)” (it wasn't set)
“Processor type and features” > “Preemption model” > “Preemptible kernel”

Now the computer is cool and quiet again. I suppose the problem was in the Timer frequency, because in slackware 12.2 iirc in the nosmp kernel it was set to 250 Hz.

regards

solar

Last edited by solarfields; 03-13-2011 at 04:57 AM.
 
Old 03-13-2011, 04:57 AM   #2
ponce
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Aug 2004
Location: Pisa, Italy
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 7,111

Rep: Reputation: 4183Reputation: 4183Reputation: 4183Reputation: 4183Reputation: 4183Reputation: 4183Reputation: 4183Reputation: 4183Reputation: 4183Reputation: 4183Reputation: 4183
I think the 1000Hz freq has been choosen to increase desktop responsiveness (it matters a lot), but has obviously this backside effect on laptops.
Maybe you can have the best results if you leave it at 1000Hz and if you set the dynamic ticks (that should make the difference for your fans/load), preemptible kernel and desktop preemption model in kernel config.
 
Old 03-13-2011, 05:08 AM   #3
solarfields
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2006
Location: slackalaxy.com
Distribution: Slackware, CRUX
Posts: 1,449

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 997Reputation: 997Reputation: 997Reputation: 997Reputation: 997Reputation: 997Reputation: 997Reputation: 997
i had a similar output of powertop on my old PC that had AMD Athlon Processor. However, since it was a PC I couldnt tell if there was extra heat So, I thought it had something to do with old AMD CPUs?

Now, after I have upgraded my PC, my CPU is Intel(R) Pentium(R) CPU G6950, using default generic-smp-2.6.33.4-smp, powertop shows

Top causes for wakeups:
41.3% ( 76.6) <kernel core> : hrtimer_start_range_ns (tick_sched_timer)

76.6 is much less than 1001

btw, at that time when googling for the problem I found this:

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+s...ux/+bug/373245

Last edited by solarfields; 03-13-2011 at 05:13 AM.
 
Old 03-13-2011, 05:32 AM   #4
ponce
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Aug 2004
Location: Pisa, Italy
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 7,111

Rep: Reputation: 4183Reputation: 4183Reputation: 4183Reputation: 4183Reputation: 4183Reputation: 4183Reputation: 4183Reputation: 4183Reputation: 4183Reputation: 4183Reputation: 4183
personally, on this laptop, I got the config above with no dynamic ticks and 2000Hz (but I'm not an example to follow, just a speed-freak )
 
Old 03-13-2011, 05:38 AM   #5
solarfields
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2006
Location: slackalaxy.com
Distribution: Slackware, CRUX
Posts: 1,449

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 997Reputation: 997Reputation: 997Reputation: 997Reputation: 997Reputation: 997Reputation: 997Reputation: 997
heh, when the 1337 slack comes, i may play with the kernel configuration. Personally, I found no difference in the performance between 1000 Hz and 300 Hz I guess, when you _know_ it should run better, then you see it :P
 
Old 03-13-2011, 06:13 AM   #6
H_TeXMeX_H
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301
The only difference might be when playing videos or audio.
 
Old 03-13-2011, 08:57 AM   #7
dugan
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: Canada
Distribution: distro hopper
Posts: 11,242

Rep: Reputation: 5322Reputation: 5322Reputation: 5322Reputation: 5322Reputation: 5322Reputation: 5322Reputation: 5322Reputation: 5322Reputation: 5322Reputation: 5322Reputation: 5322
For comparison, Windows runs at 300hz.

As for the load, the default setting in Slackware is to turn on CPU frequency scaling only when running on battery power. You might want to change that. See here:

http://wiki.linuxquestions.org/wiki/...ncy_scaling.3F
 
Old 03-13-2011, 09:01 AM   #8
solarfields
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2006
Location: slackalaxy.com
Distribution: Slackware, CRUX
Posts: 1,449

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 997Reputation: 997Reputation: 997Reputation: 997Reputation: 997Reputation: 997Reputation: 997Reputation: 997
my issue had nothing to do with cpu frequency scaling. It is not normal for the cpu to heat up that much when idle, even if running at the highest cpu frequency.

thanks for the info, though
 
  


Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tickless Kernel yet still get many IRQ0 timer interrupts sixerjman Linux - Kernel 2 02-23-2011 02:31 AM
tickless kernel? mcnalu Slackware 8 12-24-2009 04:16 AM
LXer: Linux: Reviewing The Tickless Kernel For x86-64 LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 07-13-2007 01:17 AM
LXer: The Impact Of A Tickless Kernel LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 02-25-2007 06:16 AM
LXer: Linux: Improving KVM Performance With A Tickless Kernel LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 01-13-2007 02:03 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:58 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration