| semitones | that would be cool | 03:17 |
|---|---|---|
| semitones | too bad he left | 03:17 |
| kristian-aalborg | greetings | 03:26 |
| === ericm|ubuntu is now known as ericm-afk | ||
| === smb` is now known as smb | ||
| cking | morning | 08:46 |
| smb | morning (.+) | 08:46 |
| === ericm-afk is now known as ericm | ||
| * cking kills pulseaudio and tries some different tweaks | 09:51 | |
| cking | apw, https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Kernel/PowerManagement | 09:58 |
| * RAOF should do some more controlled tests, but that seems to drop t420s power consumption ~4W (down to a more respectable 11-12W totally idle) | 09:59 | |
| cking | nice | 10:03 |
| apw | RAOF, which is your entry in the table ? | 10:03 |
| RAOF | There isn't one yet. See point "should do some more controlled tests". | 10:03 |
| apw | ahh :) | 10:03 |
| apw | RAOF, its very early hear | 10:04 |
| apw | here even, bah | 10:04 |
| RAOF | :P | 10:04 |
| RAOF | I wonder if that issue applies to this x200s, too. Although it can't save *that* much power; dropping power consumption 4W here would drop it down to 4W in total, which seems a bit ambitious :) | 10:04 |
| apw | RAOF, but 1w on there would be mamoth | 10:07 |
| RAOF | It might get me back up to >10h runtime on the 9cell, yeah. | 10:07 |
| * cking rummages around for his power meter | 10:32 | |
| Daviey | What is the current state of realtime kernel? | 11:24 |
| Daviey | (morning btw) | 11:24 |
| tjaalton | RAOF: which screen brightness setting did you have? | 11:28 |
| tjaalton | when testing the t420s | 11:28 |
| Daviey | apw / cking: Do you know the status of -realtime? https://wiki.ubuntu.com/RealTime , suggests -lowlatency is the focus.. but TBH, i don't understand the difference. | 11:29 |
| apw | realtime hasn't existed for some time has it ? | 11:29 |
| apw | Daviey, realtime is presumably the -rt patchset, which lags the main kernel by many releases | 11:30 |
| apw | Daviey, lowlatency is about using upstream features is differnet configurations to get the best latency response they can | 11:30 |
| Daviey | apw: so TL;DR suggests we don't have a good story in that area? | 11:30 |
| apw | TL;DR ? | 11:35 |
| tjaalton | "too long; didn't read" :) | 11:38 |
| tjaalton | RAOF: 9,2W here, with rc6 enabled too, though the brightness is ~60% | 11:40 |
| tjaalton | turning bt off (0,5W), min_power for sata (0,5W) and brightness to minimum drops the estimate to ~7,1W :P | 11:51 |
| tjaalton | can't get lower than 6,2W | 12:08 |
| apw | does anyone know if we had a launchpad rollout recently? i am seeing new delete buttons next to tasks and nominations | 12:35 |
| Daviey | apw: that was on planet.ubuntu.com as a new feature | 12:36 |
| apw | oh what does it do | 12:36 |
| Daviey | apw: if i add a task for FOOBAR project by accident, previously all you could do was mark it invalid. Now you can remove it. | 12:37 |
| apw | any idea what it means for a nomination, will it remove all precice ones or just the one on the specific task | 12:38 |
| diwic | no more "the NULL project" I assume :-) | 12:38 |
| Daviey | apw: http://blog.launchpad.net/bug-tracking/removing-a-project-from-a-shared-bug-report | 12:38 |
| Daviey | apw: NFI, try it on https://staging.launchpad.net/ | 12:39 |
| * apw is tempted to hit it on production just to see what explodes | 12:44 | |
| Daviey | lol | 12:45 |
| apw | Daviey, and anyhow as usual anything i click on on staging leads to an oops | 12:46 |
| apw | Daviey, oh and it doesn't have the code for that rolled out anyhow | 12:47 |
| Daviey | hah | 12:47 |
| === smb` is now known as smb | ||
| ogra_ | apw, do you remember the conclusions from our hallway hack session about dropping the initrd ? was it "kernel team rolls uuid support into the in-kernel tub | 13:29 |
| ogra_ | ergh | 13:29 |
| ogra_ | ... into the in-kernel-stub initrd, then "stopwatch boot time diffs on different arches with that change" | 13:30 |
| ogra_ | ? | 13:30 |
| apw | there is cirtainly a 'comparison of the three no-initrd, small initrd =mod, and fat' to produce | 13:40 |
| ogra_ | right, i'm just thinking about how to turn it into proper WIs | 13:41 |
| apw | there should citainly be one to say do that comparison, and perhaps one to investigate use of the internal initrd | 13:42 |
| apw | i suspect maintainance of that is so fraught with complexity its not worth it | 13:43 |
| ogra_ | would it be ok to write "rtg: to provide a kernel with uuid support in the internal initrd for measuring" ? | 13:43 |
| apw | i'd just put canonical-kernel-team on those and we can figure out who | 13:43 |
| ogra_ | i can do all the measuring items and assign them to me | 13:43 |
| ogra_ | k | 13:43 |
| ogra_ | would we need to make the kernel learn a new cmdline option ? noinitrd will likely also skip the internal one i guess | 13:45 |
| ogra_ | (or wont it ?) | 13:45 |
| apw | initrd handling is all grub side | 14:00 |
| apw | bootloader side, we only use one if its passed | 14:00 |
| ogra_ | apw, but how does the kernel know if it should use the in kernel initrd or no initrd ? | 14:07 |
| apw | it always uses the internal initrd, just mosttimes it is empty | 14:26 |
| apw | unless there is one passed from outside | 14:26 |
| ogra_ | k | 14:28 |
| ogra_ | thx :) | 14:29 |
| * apw runs to toolstation, seems one of our switches i about to fall apart and expose live wires ! | 14:34 | |
| === yofel_ is now known as yofel | ||
| * smb looks over to apw, wondering whether the curse is spreading now... | 15:11 | |
| apw | heh yeah, i'd not connected that things here were all falling appart cause the were house ones | 15:12 |
| apw | but clearly smb is to blame | 15:12 |
| smb | Always a pleasure to pass on the fun. :-P | 15:12 |
| apw | heh thanks | 15:14 |
| apw | heh nice, my battery is so flat that gsd is reporting it as not-present | 15:35 |
| smb | hm, is it present in the acpi stat? | 15:36 |
| apw | yep and now it has a charge of != 0, its now present in gsb too | 15:36 |
| smb | maybe a feature... a battery without charge is not really present... :-P | 15:37 |
| _ruben | i wonder if it'd detect my fully charged battery, which is not within my laptop currently ;) | 15:52 |
| ppisati | -CONFIG_BOOT_PRINTK_DELAY=y -- why do we have this on? | 15:56 |
| smb | to allow using the option iirc | 15:57 |
| smb | it allows setting the delay when y (does not do any delay by default) | 15:57 |
| ppisati | ah ok | 16:00 |
| * ppisati is having fun with the omap4 config sync/review | 16:00 | |
| apw | ppisati, sounds riviting | 16:02 |
| apw | cking, i added a notes column to your sheet | 16:02 |
| apw | cking, and i am updating and charging a couple of my laptops to test | 16:03 |
| cking | apw, yeah, good note to add, nice to flag up broken results | 16:09 |
| apw | cking, this fix does what enable alpm by defualt ? | 17:14 |
| cking | alpm? ASPM don't you mean? | 17:15 |
| apw | cking, possibly :) | 17:15 |
| cking | alpm is sata related | 17:15 |
| apw | and what is aspm | 17:16 |
| cking | ASPM is the PCIe power tweaks | 17:16 |
| smb | Too many STLBs | 17:16 |
| cking | if ALPM is borked you may lose data | 17:16 |
| smb | STLAs even | 17:16 |
| cking | ALPM = Aggressive Link Power management for SATA | 17:17 |
| apw | cking, anyhow does nothing for my acer :( | 17:17 |
| smb | cking, Aggressive or Advanced as well? | 17:17 |
| cking | Aggressively Advanced?! | 17:17 |
| apw | cking, does your version number appear in version_signature? | 17:18 |
| smb | apw, As far as I understand the change it would only disable that now if the bios had enabled it and os is granted control | 17:18 |
| apw | and if not, how did you arrange that exactly | 17:18 |
| cking | apw, smb was discussing the version signature with me just now, seems like I foobar'd it | 17:19 |
| smb | apw, look for _OSC in your dmesg | 17:19 |
| apw | it is very confusing that you managed to elide your +foo ... and makes it hard to know if i am testing the right thing | 17:19 |
| apw | i see those | 17:19 |
| cking | apw, I know, I failed, this is what happens when I rush things over saturday :-( | 17:20 |
| apw | just amazed it is actually possible | 17:20 |
| smb | apw, I was surprised as well | 17:20 |
| cking | nothing surprised me | 17:20 |
| apw | normally one has to work pretty hard to stop it being in there | 17:21 |
| smb | cking, good point is, do you know whether aspm on/off would yield any message and which? | 17:22 |
| cking | smb, theoretically yes, but I dunno off the top of my head | 17:23 |
| smb | On my netbook here _OSC fails, but I don't know whether it would have the bit enabled or not. Well, from the data it does not seem to have | 17:25 |
| smb | apw, You can check whether your current kernel was compiled on Sat. ;) | 17:26 |
| cking | smb, what do you mean by _OSC fails? | 17:26 |
| smb | cking, pci0000:00: Unable to request _OSC control (_OSC support mask: 0x0f) | 17:27 |
| cking | ah, yes, that that then disables ASPM | 17:27 |
| smb | cking, Currently. With the patch I would assume it would be left alone if the bios had enabled it | 17:28 |
| cking | smb, I believe that's the idea behind it | 17:28 |
| smb | So this was taken, running the Sat. kernel. But power usage seems to be unchanged. Just was wondering whther there would be a piece of msg saying something... Hm, though that would only appear in the unpatched kernel... | 17:30 |
| jjohansen | smb: printk(KERN_INFO"ACPI FADT declares the system doesn't support PCIe ASPM, so disable it\n"); | 17:30 |
| smb | jjohansen, Cool. Thanks. Re-installing the original kernel to cross check | 17:31 |
| jjohansen | smb: also not this patch won't fix everybody, only some of those with broken bioses | 17:32 |
| cking | sorry, this is hard to follow at the mo, my kids are demanding my attention | 17:32 |
| jjohansen | cking: when don't they :) | 17:32 |
| apw | "do they blend?" | 17:32 |
| cking | but the gist is that some broken BIOSes caused the old code to put the system into a sub-optimal state | 17:32 |
| smb | apw is a bit harsh | 17:32 |
| smb | jjohansen, Right, I just want to make sure data taken is consistent | 17:33 |
| mjg59 | It seems that the expected behaviour is for Linux to *never* touch the ASPM bits unless we get _OSC control | 17:33 |
| cking | mjg59, where is the microsoft presentation you referred to in the patch? | 17:33 |
| mjg59 | Right now if the firmware sets the "Do not use ASPM" bit we clear ASPM state | 17:34 |
| mjg59 | Which involves touching the ASPM bits | 17:34 |
| mjg59 | It seems that we shouldn't be doing that | 17:34 |
| apw | ahh one of those subtle wordings catching us again | 17:34 |
| mjg59 | There is no wording | 17:34 |
| apw | deep joy | 17:35 |
| mjg59 | Platform expectations here are entirely undocumented | 17:35 |
| cking | well, it's kind of nebulous isn't it and it's not really mentioned in any specs we've got | 17:35 |
| mjg59 | cking: If you just google for "pci express in depth for windows vista and beyond" you should find it | 17:35 |
| cking | so theoretically we should see some platforms do well out of this patch, while others no change whatsoever and the likelyhood of worse behaviour is nil isn't it? | 17:36 |
| cking | ah google my frend | 17:36 |
| mjg59 | In theory | 17:36 |
| cking | well, so far the minimal crowd sourcing results look that way too | 17:37 |
| mjg59 | The machine that triggered the original patch /seems/ to give full _OSC control | 17:37 |
| mjg59 | Which would mean it still works with this patch | 17:37 |
| apw | cking, where is my automation *stamp* | 17:38 |
| cking | apw, what do you mean? | 17:39 |
| * apw is bored of oding this testing by hand already on 2 machines | 17:39 | |
| cking | apw, lazy git ;-) | 17:39 |
| smb | apw, You have not written it, yet? | 17:40 |
| cking | I'm writing some code right now, I've got netfilter process monitoring and the ACPI battery monitoring in, just need to tidy it up. | 17:41 |
| apw | cking, this machine here, i've plugged the power back in, and am still getting acpi estimates | 17:41 |
| apw | that seems unexpected | 17:41 |
| cking | bad powerflop behaviour perhaps? | 17:42 |
| apw | most likey | 17:42 |
| cking | this is why I'm hacking my own code, to ensure it's done right | 17:42 |
| cking | or more right ;-) | 17:42 |
| ogra_ | whats the superlative of right ? | 17:43 |
| ogra_ | rightest ? :) | 17:44 |
| cking | not more right for sure | 17:44 |
| apw | rightingly | 17:44 |
| cking | even righter | 17:44 |
| ogra_ | so right :) | 17:44 |
| cking | more rightish | 17:44 |
| apw | less ridingcrop perhaps | 17:45 |
| smb | righton | 17:45 |
| kraut | howdy | 17:46 |
| kraut | i got a strange issue with the 3.0.x kernel. i wrote a daemon which watches if network devices are available with the kernel mac-table | 17:46 |
| kraut | after i upgraded to 3.0.x the timeout "gc_stale_time" doesn't as supposed to | 17:46 |
| kraut | gc_stale_time is set to 60 but it takes much more time until the entry wents from "STALE" to "FAILED". | 17:47 |
| apw | the entry in which table ? | 17:47 |
| kraut | could anybody tell me what changed from 2.6 to 3.0? | 17:47 |
| kraut | apw: arp | 17:47 |
| kraut | root@exodus:/proc# ip -4 neigh show dev br0 | grep "192.168.1.12 lladdr" | 17:47 |
| kraut | 192.168.1.12 lladdr 00:23:76:4f:8e:3b STALE | 17:47 |
| kraut | f.e. | 17:47 |
| apw | which kernel version is it confirmed working as you expected ? | 17:48 |
| kraut | wait | 17:48 |
| kraut | meh, deleted anyone because of diskusage | 17:49 |
| kraut | the last one from the last ubuntu version | 17:49 |
| kraut | hmm | 17:49 |
| kraut | linux-image-2.6.31-21-generic | 17:49 |
| kraut | this one f.e. | 17:49 |
| kraut | the entry above is still on "STALE" by the way :/ | 17:50 |
| apw | so since Lucid ? | 17:50 |
| kraut | yep | 17:50 |
| apw | no 31 isn't anything | 17:50 |
| kraut | can't remeber all the "code names" ;) | 17:50 |
| kraut | with 11.04 everything was fine, with 11.11 not. | 17:50 |
| kraut | or 11.10 better said | 17:50 |
| apw | ok so 2.6.38 then | 17:51 |
| kraut | hmm. can't really tell. from dpkg -l it must be 2.6.31-21? | 17:51 |
| apw | smb, did we release with .31 in anything? karmic maybe ? | 17:51 |
| kraut | ah, i think i purged the old packages so i can't figure out with dpkg -l | 17:52 |
| * ogra_ doesnt think it is a kernel prob ... | 17:52 | |
| smb | apw, No, except maybe he is on arm | 17:52 |
| apw | kraut, is this imx51 ? | 17:52 |
| kraut | ogra_: i'm not really sure weither it's a kernel issue or not | 17:52 |
| kraut | but as i remember the arp table is a kernel "feature" and i think there is anywhere anyhow an issue :/ | 17:52 |
| ogra_ | i can use the command here on my ac100 and get STALE on oneiric with .38 ... if i try it on my x86 laptop under natty with .38 i dont get the STALE | 17:53 |
| kraut | apw: lmx51? | 17:53 |
| kraut | x86 | 17:53 |
| kraut | Linux exodus 3.0.0-12-generic #20-Ubuntu SMP Fri Oct 7 14:50:42 UTC 2011 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux | 17:53 |
| * ogra_ would suspect the ip command to have changed here, rather than the kernel | 17:53 | |
| apw | ok so if it worked on 11.04 which was natty, then the kernel would have been a 2.6.38 kernel | 17:53 |
| kraut | and no, it's not an issue with the hostname ;) | 17:53 |
| apw | and from there to 3.0 there are only 4 commits to arp | 17:53 |
| apw | none of which sound anything to do with state handling | 17:54 |
| kraut | from /proc/net/arp: | 17:54 |
| kraut | 192.168.1.11 0x1 0x2 38:e7:d8:de:bd:5d * br0 | 17:54 |
| kraut | and 0x2 is STALE IMHO | 17:54 |
| kraut | root@exodus:/proc# cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/neigh/default/gc_ | 17:55 |
| kraut | gc_interval gc_stale_time gc_thresh1 gc_thresh2 gc_thresh3 | 17:55 |
| kraut | is gc_thresh new? | 17:55 |
| kraut | brb | 17:56 |
| apw | nope | 17:56 |
| * ogra_ would suggest looking at the changelog of iproute | 17:57 | |
| apw | its curtainly true that iproute has changed a lot in oneirc | 17:59 |
| kraut | i don't think it's an issue with ip-utils because /proc/net/arp shows me the same issue? | 18:00 |
| ogra_ | ogra@horus:~$ zgrep -i ARP /usr/share/doc/iproute/changelog.Debian.gz | 18:00 |
| ogra_ | Update ARP header type table | 18:00 |
| ogra_ | well | 18:01 |
| ogra_ | ... | 18:01 |
| kraut | hmmmm! | 18:01 |
| apw | cking, this is hopeless, the powertop interval changes randomly depending on how the values change | 18:03 |
| apw | 10s 15 45 sometimes | 18:03 |
| cking | apw, now you see why I'm hacking up something more useful | 18:04 |
| apw | i am more wondering what use any of the results are given this behaviour | 18:04 |
| cking | apw, they are limited, but will hopefully show up any seriously bad power issues or improvements | 18:07 |
| cking | hence, that's why I'm getting some proper kit | 18:07 |
| apw | proper kit is approriate, but something more usefult for 'us' would be good | 18:08 |
| cking | yep, but once I can calibrate typical ACPI results against real world power usage and make powertop like tool we will be in a better shape, but this is only day #1 of the project so progress is limited so far ;-) | 18:09 |
| kraut | from /usr/include/linux/neighbour.h the flag 0x2 in /proc/net/arp means REACHABLE so i think it's still a kernel issue | 18:11 |
| smb | cking, The only "downside" seems to be that external kit can only gather power consumption while plugged into ac, while acpi only gives you the consumption when on battery... | 18:11 |
| apw | kraut, well we'll need an accurate kernel version where its behaving different to work out where to look | 18:12 |
| apw | kraut, from what you've told me there doen't look to be any significant changes at all between the two versions | 18:12 |
| cking | smb, well, I can take these machines apart you know... | 18:13 |
| smb | cking, You even might succeed in putting them back together. :) I may not succeed on that part. | 18:14 |
| apw | cking, nothing i've tested so far sees any benefit | 18:14 |
| cking | apw, it has been beneficial, now you see why I'm doing this over the next few months and you're not. | 18:16 |
| apw | cking, oh i know why you are doing it :) i don't have the patience :) | 18:17 |
| kraut | apw: that's not so easy because i can't downgrade that way :/ | 18:18 |
| apw | kraut, you should be able to run the older kernel with teh current userspace generally | 18:18 |
| kraut | if i didn't deleted it, that wouldn't be a problem^^ | 18:19 |
| apw | you can get it back from the launchpad librian | 18:19 |
| apw | https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/natty/+source/linux | 18:20 |
| kraut | can't i add that one to my sources.list? | 18:24 |
| kraut | deb https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/natty/+source/linux oneiric main | 18:24 |
| apw | that sounds dangerous | 18:25 |
| apw | oh that, no that isn't an archive | 18:25 |
| kraut | hmm | 18:28 |
| hallyn | hoping to test the new power-saving oneiric kernel today, but - I'm curious, does anyone have an idea offhand on whether th elucid kernel would be even still more battery-friendly? | 18:28 |
| kraut | so should i take this one? https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/natty/+source/linux/2.6.38-13.52/+files/linux_2.6.38.orig.tar.gz | 18:28 |
| kraut | i think i finish for today. i'm fed up :/ | 18:31 |
| kraut | thanks for helping so far! | 18:34 |
| cking | apw, so I want to make my power measuring tool skip a reading if it sees processes wakeup/die. do you think that's a sane idea? | 18:48 |
| cking | s/wakeup/fork or exec or exit/ | 18:49 |
| apw | my experience is more than one after are affected, i wonder if we could just consider restarting | 18:49 |
| apw | but dropping one or more is not unreasonable perhaps | 18:49 |
| cking | I've now got a vmstat like output including average + stddev power data | 18:50 |
| cking | gonna sleep on the this and tinker some more tomorrow | 18:50 |
| apw | cking, sounds planwise | 18:50 |
| cking | been reading the power meter manual, it's a nice bit of kit | 18:51 |
| cking | just hope I don't blow it up | 18:51 |
| apw | cking, stay away from smb | 18:53 |
| cking | he's had his fair share of dead H/W | 18:53 |
| apw | and i realise the switch which just broke and tried to kill me, was one he has been using | 18:55 |
| apw | just saying | 18:55 |
| cking | heh | 18:55 |
| * apw wanders off | 19:10 | |
| smoser | smb, around ? | 20:42 |
| redzarf | trying to rebuild lucid kernel on amazon ec2, but it's not building the image deb file (only headers, docs, tools) | 23:26 |
| redzarf | any ideas? | 23:26 |
| redzarf | kernel version is linux-ec2_2.6.32-319.39 | 23:27 |
| GrueMaster | Anyone know what happened to linux-ti-omap4: 3.0.0-1206.12 ? I tested it in proposed last week, and it is marked now as fix-released. The source and meta are on the server, but not the kernel deb. | 23:49 |
| GrueMaster | For oneiric. | 23:49 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!