[lkml]   [2007]   [Jul]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Hibernation Redesign
On Wednesday, 11 July 2007 14:09, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > > Freezing of tasks is slowing down suspend. Don't know how serious
> > > this is, suspend is pretty fast, but could possibly be even faster.
> >
> > It's FUD. Freezing of tasks normally takes next to no time. I've never
> > understood the rediculously long timeout it has. If freezing succeeds, all
> > processes are frozen within 1/2 a second tops. If it fails, nothing is going
> > to change in the following 19.5 seconds (or whatever it is if I don't
> > remember the value properly).
> Right. The 20s timeout is again a sign of brokenness.

Are you still serious?

> If we expect something to fail, it should fail immediately, without
> waiting for arbitrary timeouts.

I don't agree. If you think so, then please tell me what the softlockup
infrastructure is for.

> And if we don't expect it to fail, why the timeout?

We know that it can fail, so we use the timeout to detect failures.

> Of course we know it can fail (network problems, etc), so it's wrong
> whatever way we look at it.

Are you trying to say that whatever can fail is wrong?


"Premature optimization is the root of all evil." - Donald Knuth
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2007-07-11 14:23    [W:0.168 / U:2.036 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site