Faulty Microsoft Driver Saps Intel Core Duo power

Critical_ writes "Tom's Hardware recently discovered a bug in Microsoft's ACPI driver implementation under Windows XP SP2 that causes a loss of more than one hour of battery time when connecting any USB 2.0 device to an Intel Core Duo based system. Apparently Microsoft, Intel and ODMs have known of this problem under a confidentiality agreement since July 12, 2005 via (a still private) Knowledge Base article KB899179. The bug lies in the asynchronous scheduler component inadvertently being left running causing Windows' internal task scheduler (ITS) to treat it as a running process involving the attached device. This in turn prevents the ITS from powering down the processor into one of the ACPI sleep states causing the system to use more battery power. At this time there seems to be no fix. Strangely, single-core systems and AMD systems are not affected. This leads one to wonder if it is truely a software problem or if there a much larger hardware problem that may affect Core Duo equipped Apple systems."

And thanks to the confidiality agreement

You'll never know if you're being asked to buy broken hardware or broken software.

Seems best to stay away from both companies.
Why can't they just be honest and say "this is the problem and this is what we're doing about it"

Re:And thanks to the confidiality agreement

Why can't they just be honest and say "this is the problem and this is what we're doing about it"

Because they don't want people to know there is a problem, and that they're not doing anything about it, maybe?

Re:And thanks to the confidiality agreement

Did anyone else read this, slap their foreheads, and yell "THAT's why Apple is claiming the demonstration MacBook Pros were prototypes and why they're not releasing battery life figures?"

It actually all makes sense now. The hardware may be finalised and actually be rolling off production lines, but I'm guessing the "prototype" designation actually reflects the software side, with Apple also triggering the same bug and wanting to work with Intel on a workaround.

full disclosure of bugs

I'm not sure you can label the product as "defective". Software is too complicated to be labelled "defective" just becuase it has bugs. Moreover, I'm not sure you could legally require Microsoft to reveal every bug they know about, especially since the software you bought carried a prominent notice in the EULA saying, roughly "This software is not guaranteed to work; if it fails to function in some way it's not our problem -- you shouldn't have relied on it in the first place". They never promised the ACPI driver will actually work. Note that the GPL carries a similar clause.

That said, I'd rather rely on free software to function as advertized. When the big pieces fail (kernel, web broswer, ...) fixes are usually quick since many experts are working transparently. When small pieces fail (my favorite editor) I can fix them myself and submit a patch.

The other solution, of course, is to pay for warranty. The problem is that no-one is willing to guarantee Windows will work, and that includes the hardware OEM -- I'm sure the people who make the laptop will say that they can't warranty someone else's OS.

Why?

Why does the last phrase target specifically Apple computers since the beginning mentions Win XP. Obviously, this affects XP laptops with a core duo.

Re:Why?

Because nobody cares about another bug in Windows. But what if it's not in Windows, and it can affect the Mac?? Panic!

Re:Why?

The problem is where does the failure lie?

My bet the problem is in BIOS, and not EFI. Since this affects only XP computers and those require bios to function. BIOS with ACPI has always been a poor hack. Windows Computers have always had a hard time returning from sleep with 100% accuracy. Maybe it wasn't windows fault but the bios underneath.

Wait did I just say it wasn't windows fault? damn I have got to get some sleep.

Re:Why?

My bet the problem is in BIOS, and not EFI. Since this affects only XP computers and those require bios to function. BIOS with ACPI has always been a poor hack.

Yeah, listen to what OpenBSD developers implementing ACPI support thinks about ACPI [undeadly.org]

Also the ACPI spec blows other specs out of the water when it comes to unreadability. It's a classical spec in the sense that someone was bribed to go to Honolulu to "talk the spec over" and "reach a compromise". They don't even use spec language like shall and optional! It's deliberately vague so that everyone involved could agree. So Marco's engineering assessment is ACPI is a pile of camel pooh.

Re:Why?

(if it was, they would have fixed it by now).

Ummm, because Microsoft is well known for getting software fixes out quickly?

confidentiality agreement

This sort of thing should not be permitted. We arent talking about R&D agreements here, this is a *currently selling product*. They are hiding the fact its known defective from the consumer.

Isnt this a basis for a class action fraud suit? If not, it should be investigated by the SEC at least.

Re:confidentiality agreement

Isnt this a basis for a class action fraud suit? If not, it should be investigated by the SEC at least.

The SEC investigates fraud which victimizes shareholders. This is fraud against consumers, a much less important group.

Re:confidentiality agreement

Would you sue ATI or NVIDIA for updating their drivers and getting more out of the hardware? Obviously there was a problem where the hardware wasn't being used to its full potential?

How does the shorter battery life make this defective? If the company had sold this as having a much longer battery life then failed to live up to it then that would be a problem. Just because the software (or hardware bug) isn't shutting down a processor doesn't make this a legal issue.

Kinda First Post

First post from a laptop running XP SP2 with a USB 2.0 device connected with the asynchronous scheduler component running preventing my CPU from entering one of the ACPI sleep states and thus draining my battery life.

Re:Kinda First Post

Last post from a laptop running XP SP2 with a USB 2.0 device connected with the asynchronous scheduler component running preventing my CPU from entering one of the ACPI sleep states and thus draining my battery life.

See you again when I find my charger.

Submitter didn't RFTA

Quote: "Since Microsoft's drivers are now believed to be directly involved, then all of Apple's upcoming MacBook Pro systems - which use the Core Duo processor and 945 chipset - should be unaffected by this issue. We have yet to attain access to a MacBook Pro to verify this." Why bring Apple into a conversation about a defective XP driver?

You hit the nail on its head!

"Hmm... Microsoft, a bug, Intel, Apple and dual core in the same article. I wonder if this couldn't generate some tasty clicks? Quick, put it on the frontpage!"

Comon..

"Strangely, single-core systems and AMD systems are not affected."

So once again we have a chance to bash Intel, perfect!

Did you ever stop to consider that maybe that specific state, which cannot be reached, is only utilized by the Core Duo? Maybe if AMD had a laptop dual core chip we'd see the same behavior.. But hey, if we can make Intel look bad because of a Microsoft bug, then we are two for two!

It looks like a software problem.

I do not know the exact details, so accept this as a pure speculation.

It seems like a software problem. Think it like the "Weak Reference" issue in garbage collection. Since a system task is always demanding CPU the ACPI subsystem will of course not decrease the power.

Such things also happen in Linux world. For example the update daemon [tuwien.ac.at] causes disk activity every 10 minutes, which prevented the hard disk from spinning down. Since this was a big issue with laptops, it's now fixed in later versions (my system no longer has /sbin/update).

YEAAAAHHHHHH...

This article really pinpoints to me one of the best things of all about Apple switching to Intel, REAL OS COMPETITION. Now at last if Windows seems dog slow, you can't claim it's the Intel chip... or when the Finder seems the suckage, you KNOW it's the Finder and not the PPC chip running at a lower MHz. Once we start seeing these systems getting into people's hands and they notice a real difference between the two OS' on the same hardware you can bet they'll be whining about it and performance will definitely be a focus for both OS venders. In the past they could have been lax about it... thinking "But what can they compare it to?" but now if they can show that Quartz drawing is 3x slower than DirectX or vice versa, you can bet there will be performance updates in the near future. This is better for all of us.

P.S. Linux doesn't really count in this manner because it gets ignored as a "geek OS" and not really something anybody can run.

Re:Disgusting Insensitivity

Maybe CowboyNeal has been in the living in the basement for too long, but everybody else knows that saying "chink" is very offensive to Chinese, Japanese, and other Asian people.

"Chink in the armour" is an outrageously common phrase in the English language.

My thoughts when I read it? "What does armour have to do with battery runtimes...".

The first thoughts of racist association did not enter my head until I read your comment. I'm from Australia, though, and if people are going to be racist there are much worse words that can be used.

Re:Disgusting Insensitivity

Maybe CowboyNeal has been in the living in the basement for too long, but everybody else knows that saying "chink" is very offensive to Chinese, Japanese, and other Asian people.

I know it's an old phrase, but niggardly is a word that most people do not use anymore either because of the racist connotations.

Don't be ridiculous. A "chink" in English (including American) is a small crack or a weak spot. And a "niggard" is an English word meaning a miser. It dates back to Middle English, and before that to Scandinavian languages. Neither word has anything to do with racism.

Re:Disgusting Insensitivity

I'm sorry, there must be a spic on my screen. Isn't Arnold Schwartzanigger a fan of Canadian honkey?
I enjoy watching it too sometimes, unless it's a nice windy day out, then I'd rather be out flying a kike.

Re:AMD's Dual Core x2 4400+ problem as well

I have almost exactly the same hardware (except for the graphics card, I use a Quadro FX4000), and there is absolutely no problem.

I dual boot between Windows XP Pro SP2 for gaming and Windows XP Pro x64 for work, and both work absolutely perfectly. The only issue so far has been that of stable 64-bit driver, but that only pertains to the graphics card.

You might want to check your system for memory errors (if you are using cheapo RAM) or for a motherboard problem. Windows itself (assuming you arent using any broken drivers) works brilliantly with this hardware.

I have been running this system since November with only one or two reboots.

Re:Yawn, non free sucks.

Critical_ sees a typical Wintel bug and thinks Apple has a problem. It's an interesting thought, but not one to publish without checking.

I never concluded Apple had a problem. Rather I suggest it could be a problem because Microsoft's ACPI driver communicates with the ICH7-M Southbridge. If I am not mistaken, Apple uses the same southbridge on it's hardware. As the article repeatedly states, this issue can be anywhere on the chain from the southbridge, the Microsoft driver or even the attach peripheral. If it's purely a driver problem then why has it taken Microsoft and Intel 6 months of a non-working fix? Why are single core systems not affected by the same driver? Could this issue affect Linux or Mac OSX users on those platforms? Sure it could be a state-based issue but no one can really know until further testing takes place and Intel/Microsoft release more details.

God I wish I had mod points right now.

"IBM cell based hardware running GNU/Linux is going to blow all of this trash into a distantly remembered nightmare."

No, it isn't. It's not even going to come close. It's not even going to exist, ever. 90% of the Cell's computing horsepower is in the SPUs, which are optimized for signal processing and geometry processing applications (namely, grinding away on lots of number crunching). No instruction reordering, floating-point only, and very limited branching functionality. The coprocessors are more comparable to devices such as Analog Devices' TigerSHARC or TI's TMS320 series than any general purpose CPU. Despite the insane floating point performance, you don't see TigerSHARC or TMS320 based computers, do you? That's because they are not suitable for general purpose computing in any way.

The Cell's general purpose "controller" CPU is an incredibly stripped down PPC core that has incredibly low performance compared to any standard general purpose CPU.

While it will have incredible performance for gaming and signal processing, the Cell is an utterly crap CPU for general purpose computing. Using a Cell in a normal desktop machine is like trying to cut a tree trunk with a cordless electric drill rather than a reciprocating saw. No matter how nice of a drill it is, it's going to do a shitty job compared to even the cheapest recipro saw, if it manages to do the job at all.