linux-kernel - Re: Attempted summary of suspend-blockers LKML thread, take three

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20100813152912.GE2511@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Fri, 13 Aug 2010 08:29:12 -0700
From:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc:	Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@...il.com>,
	"Ted Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, david@...g.hm,
	Brian Swetland <swetland@...gle.com>,
	linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	arve@...roid.com, mjg59@...f.ucam.org, pavel@....cz,
	florian@...kler.org, rjw@...k.pl, stern@...land.harvard.edu,
	peterz@...radead.org, tglx@...utronix.de, menage@...gle.com,
	david-b@...bell.net, James.Bottomley@...e.de, arjan@...radead.org,
	swmike@....pp.se, galibert@...ox.com, dipankar@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: Attempted summary of suspend-blockers LKML thread, take three

On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 11:57:51AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > Think in terms of an ARM laptop. What good is opportunistic suspend if
> > > it's not going to help when the laptop is being used?
> > 
> > For when the laptop is not being used, presumably.
> 
> Or in time between keystrokes for most of the platform (backlight
> excepted). The Intel MID x86 devices are at the point that suspend/resume
> time on x86 is being hurt by the kernel rewriting smp alternatives as we
> go from 2 processors live to 1 and back.

Given that you are talking about going from 2 processors to 1 and back,
I would guess that you are not actually talking about suspend/resume,
which is a system-wide thing rather than a CPU-by-CPU thing.  I am not
sure whether you are using CPU hotplug or invoking SMP alternatives once
all but one CPU is idle.

Can't say that I can tell exactly what pit you are digging for me here.  ;-)

							Thanx, Paul
--
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/