[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:0.034 / U:3.472 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site