[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080203055429.GA24996@elte.hu>
Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2008 06:54:29 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] sleepy linux self-test
* Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
> [ 23.893598] Calling initcall 0xc0c518b0: be_sleepy+0x0/0x170()
> [ 23.901601] PM: no wakelarm-capable RTC
> [ 23.905599] initcall 0xc0c518b0: be_sleepy+0x0/0x170() returned 0.
> [ 23.910879] initcall 0xc0c518b0 ran for 3 msecs: be_sleepy+0x0/0x170()
>
> so close, yet so far away :-)
good news: the suspend+resume self-test works perfectly now! :-)
[ 24.018541] Calling initcall 0xc0c70a40: be_sleepy+0x0/0x170()
[ 24.023780] PM: wakealarm test with Suspend-to-RAM
[ 24.027503] PM: Syncing filesystems ... done.
[ 24.032177] PM: Preparing system for mem sleep
[ .........]
[ 30.317160] initcall 0xc0c70a40: be_sleepy+0x0/0x170() returned 0.
[ 30.321593] initcall 0xc0c70a40 ran for 6289 msecs: be_sleepy+0x0/0x170()
that's a successful suspend+resume cycle, all automatic!
now, this was _totally_ non-obvious to set up. (config attached) I had
the (surely incorrect) impression that the new RTC code does everything
it can to keep itself not used ;-) It did not complain that it's not the
default RTC driver, and it did not complain that it's configured in a
way that makes it functionally inferior.
Please dont be that shy and give us a really prominent option that does
something like:
CONFIG_USE_THE_COOL_NEW_RTC_CODE=y
with all its bells and whistles, and punch out the old
drivers/char/rtc.c RTC driver if this option is enabled. Believe me,
people _want_ to run your code on all the PC distros too. (and as a
side-effect all the non-PC platforms are helped too)
Small feature request: could you please measure the duration
suspend+resume cycle and print out the result to the kernel console like
this:
INFO: suspend+resume test succeeded and took 1.289 seconds.
such a message would be useful in flagging suspend+resume delay
regressions. (and to automate the bisection of such regressions, etc.)
(Please keep the millioseconds portion too - that way i can follow the
finer details of suspend+resume performance over time as well.)
For example recently someone introduced a 5-10 seconds delay into the
suspend+resume cycle (yeah, that bloke was me), so it would also be nice
to add some hard limit on how much it takes:
WARNING: suspend+resume test took more than 5 seconds.
and print a stack trace via WARN_ON(1), so that kerneloops.org can pick
up such regressions immediately. This would be dependent on this
self-test option.
please also rename CONFIG_PM_WAKEALARM_TEST to something more
descriptive, such as: CONFIG_SUSPEND_SELF_TEST=y.
another set of small usability feature requests: please also add a boot
option to disable/enable the suspend self-test, and allow the test to be
built into the kernel but disabled by default. Perhaps even a sysctl to
activate it runtime. That way distros can build it in by default but can
keep it disabled.
Ingo
View attachment "config" of type "text/plain" (52848 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists