[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <55A668FE.80409@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 10:06:54 -0400
From: Austin S Hemmelgarn <ahferroin7@...il.com>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
CC: rjw@...ysocki.net, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] suspend: make sync() on suspend-to-RAM optional
On 2015-07-15 02:43, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Tue 2015-07-14 22:24:51, Len Brown wrote:
>> From: Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>
>>
>> The Linux kernel suspend path has traditionally invoked sys_sync().
>>
>> But sys_sync() can be expensive, and some systems do not want
>> to pay the cost of sys_sync() on every suspend.
>
> Have you measured how expesive it can be, and why it is expensive?
How expensive it is can vary widely, but it pretty much boils down to
how much dirty data still needs written out, and how slow the storage it
needs written to is. There's not really much that can be done in the
kernel to change this, and most userspace suspend systems call sync
themselves during the suspend sequence.
Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/pkcs7-signature" (2967 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists