Comment 108 for bug 524281

Thanks for setting these up. Sorry I haven't been able to give a better bug
report than "annoying behavior" so far, I should haber time to investigate
tomorrow.

For what it's worth, there's a weird thing that happens on some android
phones where the touch screen is "coarsely quantized" if you try to
overclock it to a speed incompatible with the chip. It's at best weak
speculation, but maybe something funky is happening where X is thinking the
cpu it's on is at a different speed than it's really running at. Honestly, I
should try to entertains the patch before making such claims.

On Jul 24, 2010 1:11 AM, "Brian Rogers" <email address hidden> wrote:

I've uploaded a pair of rc6-based kernels, rc6-nopatch1 and rc6-power3.
The 'nopatch' kernel is the baseline to compare against, and rc6-power3
has the proposed revert, the same as rc5-power3. Between these two
kernels, the only difference is the proposed change.

I'd like to see some testing for the responsiveness issue with these two
kernels. Try to quantify the issue in some way if you can. For example,
if the CPU usage is different between the two kernels, then I'd like to
see the numbers from top for both kernels.

If we confirm that the patch is indeed the cause of the problem, I'll
relay the message to the developers and they'll figure out what to do
next.

--
Tens of wakes per second in "[kernel scheduler] Load balancing tick" on Core
2 Duo even with on...