[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <11374134.vToUn932b7@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 01:16:58 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Oliver Neukum <oneukum@...e.de>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 2/3] PM / Runtime: force memory allocation with no I/O during runtime_resume callbcack
On Wednesday 17 of October 2012 19:07:25 Ming Lei wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl> wrote:
> >
> > This appears to be a bit too heavy handed. First of all, it seems to affect
> > all memory allocations going in parallel with the resume callback. Second,
>
> No, the flag is per task, only memory allocation inside resume callback
> is effected.
OK
> > it affects all resume callbacks, not only those where the problem really
>
> We can do it only on block device, block device's ancestor and network
> devices(iSCSI case), but that may introduce policy into PM core or add
> one flag of memalloc_noio_resume into 'dev_pm_info', could you agree
> on it?
Well, the question is how many runtime resume callbacks actually allocate
memory. If they are not too many, we can just flag all of them. Otherwise,
adding a flag may be a better approach. I'm not sure ATM.
Thanks,
Rafael
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
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