[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1603211701190.1708-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 17:02:30 -0400 (EDT)
From: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To: Woojung.Huh@...rochip.com
cc: oneukum@...e.com, <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
<UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>, <davem@...emloft.net>,
<linux@...ck-us.net>, <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] lan78xx: Protect runtime_auto check by #ifdef CONFIG_PM
On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 Woojung.Huh@...rochip.com wrote:
> > > > But this leaves open the issue that querying the device too often will
> > > > prevent it from going into autosuspend. It seems to me that the best
> > > > way to deal with this is to make sure that the autosuspend timeout is
> > > > shorter than the interal between queries, not to make the querying
> > > > conditional on !runtime_auto.
> > >
> > > Short autosuspend timeout can affect performance. For instance our
> > experiments showed that
> > > shorter than 10sec timeout made Ethernet performance degrade because
> > of wakeup delays.
> > > So, just putting shorter timeout may have some side effects.
> >
> > Sure. This just means that you need a long statistics interval --
> > longer than the autosuspend timeout. That's why I suggested making the
> > interval adjustable.
>
> What do you mean statistics interval?
> Interval calling ndo_get_stats64 or another thread/timer or else getting statistics?
The time between calls to ndo_get_stats64, since that's the routine
which queries the device.
Alan Stern
Powered by blists - more mailing lists