[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0gB2h1G_0a_BAbBtib=VxnJgF9N3Sa3QYpCeURcCtKUTQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2024 20:54:07 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>, Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>, Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Stanislaw Gruszka <stanislaw.gruszka@...ux.intel.com>, Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
Naohiro.Aota@....com, kernel-team@...a.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] PM: sleep: Restore asynchronous device resume optimization
On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 8:48 PM Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I couldn't reproduce effective max_active being pushed down to min_active
> across suspend/resume cycles on x86. There gotta be something different.
>
> - Can you please apply the following patch along with the WQ_DFL_MIN_ACTIVE
> bump, go through suspend/resume once and report the dmesg?
>
> - Regardless of the root cause, I think async should switch to a dedicated
> workqueue with explicitly raised min_active (will add an interface for
> it).
Agreed.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists