linux-kernel - Re: [RFT][PATCH v4 0/2] PM: sleep: Handle async suppliers like parents and async consumers like children

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0iRomtiFhYTndO016=zH+vDMkxJgq+EvqYfTFs-+cC8tA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2025 19:31:20 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>, 
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>, Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>, 
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, 
	Chris Bainbridge <chris.bainbridge@...il.com>, Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>, 
	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFT][PATCH v4 0/2] PM: sleep: Handle async suppliers like
 parents and async consumers like children

On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 4:01 PM Mario Limonciello
<mario.limonciello@....com> wrote:
>
> On 6/27/2025 5:40 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 12:28 AM Mario Limonciello
> > <mario.limonciello@....com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 6/26/2025 4:46 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 23 Jun 2025 at 14:55, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi Everyone,
> >>>>
> >>>> These two patches complement the recently made PM core changes related to
> >>>> the async suspend and resume of devices.  They should apply on top of
> >>>> 6.16-rc3.
> >>>>
> >>>> They were sent along with the other changes mentioned above:
> >>>>
> >>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pm/2229735.Mh6RI2rZIc@rjwysocki.net/
> >>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pm/2651185.Lt9SDvczpP@rjwysocki.net/
> >>>>
> >>>> (and this is v4 because they have been rebased in the meantime), but they don't
> >>>> make any difference on my test-bed x86 systems, so I'd appreciate a confirmation
> >>>> that they are actually needed on ARM (or another architecture using DT).
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks!
> >>>
> >>> Hi Rafael,
> >>>
> >>> I haven't yet got the time to test these, but the code looks good to
> >>> me, so feel free to add for the series:
> >>>
> >>> Reviewed-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
> >>>
> >>> Kind regards
> >>> Uffe
> >>
> >> I passed this series to some internal guys to test on a wide variety of
> >> AMD x86 hardware.  The initial testing looks good.
> >> Will keep you apprised if anything pops up.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > It would also help if you could check whether or not there is any
> > measurable performance (that is, system suspend and resume time)
> > difference between "before" and "after".
>
> Sure thing.
>
> Just to make sure we have an aligned measurement methodology:
>
> I asked them to do this both with and without the patches.
>
> * set /sys/power/pm_debug_messages before running and then capture all
> the timing prints.
> * add up all suspend events and get a total
> * add up all resume events and get a total
> * repeat 5 times
> * calculate averages for the 5 runs

Sounds good!