[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1006031602160.2933@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 16:35:12 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...e.de>
cc: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
"Gross, Mark" <mark.gross@...el.com>,
Florian Mickler <florian@...kler.org>,
Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>,
Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>, "tytso@....edu" <tytso@....edu>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux OMAP Mailing List <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
"felipe.balbi@...ia.com" <felipe.balbi@...ia.com>
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8)
On Thu, 3 Jun 2010, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-06-03 at 11:03 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > [mtg: ] This has been a pain point for the PM_QOS implementation. They change the constrain back and forth at the transaction level of the i2c driver. The pm_qos code really wasn't made to deal with such hot path use, as each such change triggers a re-computation of what the aggregate qos request is.
> >
> > That should be trivial in the usual case because 99% of the time you can
> > hot path
> >
> > the QoS entry changing is the latest one
> > there have been no other changes
> > If it is valid I can use the cached previous aggregate I cunningly
> > saved in the top QoS entry when I computed the new one
> >
> > (ie most of the time from the kernel side you have a QoS stack)
>
> It's not just the list based computation: that's trivial to fix, as you
> say ... the other problem is the notifier chain, because that's blocking
> and could be long. Could we invoke the notifier through a workqueue?
> It doesn't seem to have veto power, so it's pure notification, does it
> matter if the notice is delayed (as long as it's in order)?
It depends on the information type and for a lot of things we might
get away without notifiers.
The only real issue is when you need to get other cores out of their
deep idle state to make a new constraint work. That's what we do with
the DMA latency notifier right now.
Thanks,
tglx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists