[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130512162717.GA6305@pd.tnic>
Date: Sun, 12 May 2013 18:27:17 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Bjørn Mork <bjorn@...k.no>
Cc: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paul.mckenney@...aro.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
Subject: Re: Bisected post-3.9 regression: Resume takes 5 times as much time
as with v3.9
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 06:13:34PM +0200, Bjørn Mork wrote:
> diff --git a/kernel/rcutree.c b/kernel/rcutree.c
> index 6934238..2dcbf84 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcutree.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcutree.c
> @@ -3103,9 +3103,11 @@ static int rcu_pm_notify(struct notifier_block *self,
> {
> switch (action) {
> case PM_HIBERNATION_PREPARE:
> + case PM_SUSPEND_PREPARE:
> rcu_expedited = 1;
> break;
> - case PM_POST_RESTORE:
> + case PM_POST_HIBERNATION:
> + case PM_POST_SUSPEND:
> rcu_expedited = 0;
> break;
> default:
If I'm reading Documentation/power/notifiers.txt correctly, we only need
PM_HIBERNATION_PREPARE when we go to sleep (whatever hibernation method
we use) and PM_POST_HIBERNATION when we restore.
I don't think it matters for expediting RCU grace periods whether
we had an error during resume or not and I'd basically want to set
rcu_expedited to 0 unconditionally when resuming..
Hmm.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
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