A Comment On The Linux 2.6.38 Power Regression

[phoronix]

Phoronix: A Comment On The Linux 2.6.38 Power Regression

Jesse Barnes, the maintainer of the PCI subsystem for the Linux kernel and one of the developers who signed-off on the patch that I discovered is causing the major Linux 2.6.38 kernel power regression, has commented on the matter...

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=OTYwNA

[DeiF]

Jesse believes that Microsoft must have additional checks in place when determining whether Windows should handle Active-State Power Management or not.

Quoting Bill Gates:

One thing I find myself wondering about is whether we shouldn’t try and make the "ACPI" extensions somehow Windows specific.
It seems unfortunate if we do this work and get our partners to do the work and the result is that Linux works great without having to do the work.
Maybe there is no way Io avoid this problem but it does bother me. Maybe we couid define the APIs so that they work well with NT and not the others even if they are open.

Someone put this quote on a comment about this Phoronix finding on Slashdot.

It's originally from this email sent by Bill Gates.

[blueskynis]

Quoting Bill Gates:

Someone put this quote on a comment about this Phoronix finding on Slashdot.

It's originally from this email sent by Bill Gates.

Well...they did a good job

[leif81]

I appreciate this story. but how do we know *if* we are affected? THAT should be a story. There were a few comments in the other story today about possible ways to check but no one knew for sure. This is important enough to be a story of it's own.

[devius]

Very disappointing to know that the problem was found BUT nothing will be done about it in the short (or even medium) term. <sarcasm>That will surely help linux get a good reputation.</sarcasm>

[crumja]

Since this issue (setting ASPM bits and ignoring BIOS) didn't seem to cause many crashes/device failure before, can't we set by default and create a black list for devices that have faulty BIOS ASPM settings?

[DanL]

Very disappointing to know that the problem was found BUT nothing will be done about it in the short (or even medium) term. <sarcasm>That will surely help linux get a good reputation.</sarcasm>

'Linux' doesn't have control over mobo vendors and can't force them to write proper ACPI tables. Microsoft's monopolistic practices are at fault for that.

[deanjo]

'Linux' doesn't have control over mobo vendors and can't force them to write proper ACPI tables. Microsoft's monopolistic practices are at fault for that.

Not really, it is still the manufacturers fault. It is just that MS allows them to get away with it instead of having a proper implementation.

[DanL]

Not really, it is still the manufacturers fault. It is just that MS allows them to get away with it instead of having a proper implementation.

I agree, it IS the manufacturers' fault to some degree because they've allowed themselves to be bullied by Microsoft.

[deanjo]

I agree, it IS the manufacturers' fault to some degree because they've allowed themselves to be bullied by Microsoft.

It's not MS bullying them. A proper BIOS works in windows just as well.