Kernel problem returns.

[GreyGeek]

NOTICE: Yesterday and today the problems I had been having returned with such severity that I began to suspect RAM problems. The RAM test option on the grub menu proved my suspecions were correct, The 4GB RAM chip I bought from Best Buy on 3/11 had failed. I removed it and things appear to be back to normal. I may even try to upgrade to the -20 kernel. So the "Wild Beast" is still illusive.




A kernel bug reported on August 24, 2010 has returned.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2010/8/24/771

Date Tue, 24 Aug 2010 18:37:06 -0700 From Jesse Barnes <> Subject Re: intel ips: CPU TDP doesn't match expected value

On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 21:48:45 -0300
Cesar Eduardo Barros <cesarb@cesarb.net> wrote:

> I get the following messages on v2.6.36-rc2-203-g502adf5:
>
> intel ips 0000:00:1f.6: Warning: CPU TDP doesn't match expected value
> (found 25, expected 35)
> intel ips 0000:00:1f.6: PCI INT C -> GSI 18 (level, low) -> IRQ 18
> intel ips 0000:00:1f.6: IPS driver initialized, MCP temp limit 65535
> intel ips 0000:00:1f.6: MCP power or thermal limit exceeded
> intel ips 0000:00:1f.6: CPU power or thermal limit exceeded
>
> (The last two messages repeat very often, one of them every five
> seconds; if I understand it correctly, that is normal and expected.)
>
> The code implies the "CPU TDP doesn't match expected value" is a sanity
> check failing. Should that happen, or is there something wrong?

Yeah, it's normal, and should probably be downgraded to an
informational message. It just means your BIOS doesn't want you to
push the CPU all the way up to its maximum TDP, probably because the
platform or chassis wasn't designed for that much heat or power
consumption.

--
Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center

On my Acer 7739:

dmesg | grep 'intel ips'
[ 22.342927] intel ips 0000:00:1f.6: CPU TDP doesn't match expected value (found 25, expected 29)
[ 22.343191] intel ips 0000:00:1f.6: PCI INT A -> GSI 21 (level, low) -> IRQ 21
[ 22.347192] intel ips 0000:00:1f.6: IPS driver initialized, MCP temp limit 90

My temp max is 90 (194F) and when my screen locks up it is around 60 (140F). It has been operating in that range since I bought this laptop, and was doing fine.

While it may be "normal" for my Intel HD3000 to constantly report that it is exceeding the "thermal limit" it is NOT normal if that event locks up my screen and keyboard and forces me to do a power recycle.

Launchpad reports go back to that period and now include my own:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+s...ux/+bug/636045


PS: I was playing Minecraft 1.2.4 when the lockup occurred. Here is the apport report:

ERROR: apport (pid 3253) Mon Mar 26 09:35:12 2012: debug: session gdbus call: ERROR: apport (pid 3253) Mon Mar 26 09:35:47 2012: wrote report /var/crash/_usr_lib_jvm_java-6-openjdk-amd64_jre_bin_java.1000.crash
ERROR: apport (pid 3286) Mon Mar 26 09:36:25 2012: called for pid 3259, signal 6
ERROR: apport (pid 3286) Mon Mar 26 09:36:25 2012: executable: /usr/lib/jvm/java-6-openjdk-amd64/jre/bin/java (command line "/usr/bin/java -jar minecraft.jar")
ERROR: apport (pid 3286) Mon Mar 26 09:36:25 2012: gdbus call error: Error: GDBus.Errorrg.freedesktop.DBus.Error.ServiceUnknown: The name org.gnome.SessionManager was not provided by any .service files

And... a similar bug was reported here: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+s...ux/+bug/953205

[GreyGeek]

I downgraded to the 3.2.0-19 kernel and restored my stability. My CPU temps also dropped an average of 10F or more from the temps while running under -20.

After I removed the -20 kernel, and those from -8 to -16, and rebuilt grub.cfg the next automatic update installed -20 again. After I removed it, again, the process to sync up with the DKMS and VB installation went smoothly. After boot up I had some HD corruption and started getting various app errors related to it. So, I rebooted and the errors forced an fsck, which found and fixed some problems. After I came back up I explored Muon to see if I could use it instead of Synaptic to pin the kernel to -19. As it turned out, pinning an app under Muon is easier than under Synaptic, and those apps pinned under Synaptic aren updated anyway because apt-get nor Muon honor Synaptic pinnings. So, Munon has arrived at the point where Synaptic is no longer necessary, so I am removing it and using Muon from now on.