Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 8 Jan 2008 20:15:20 +0100 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] sleepy linux |
| |
Hi! > > > > a quick feature request: could you please make the wake-on-RTC > > > capability generic and add a CONFIG_DEBUG_SUSPEND_ON_RAM=y config > > > option (disabled by default) that does a short 1-second > > > suspend-to-RAM sequence upon bootup? That way we could test s2ram > > > automatically (which is a MUCH needed feature for automated > > > regression testing and automatic bisection). In addition, some sort > > > of 'suspend for N seconds' /sys or /dev/rtc capability would be nice > > > as well. > > > > Hmm, are you sure it is good idea to do this from kernel? I guess this > > is better done from script... > > i have this low-prio effort to make all self-checks automatically > available via 'make randconfig' as well, for all features that have no > natural exposure during normal bootup. So far we've got rcutorture, > kprobes-check, locking/lockdep-self-test and a handful of others. > External scripts tend to go out of sync and LTP takes way too much time > to finish.
Well, I can give you a three liner, and if it stops working, I'll treat is as a regression, because userland ABI changed...?
Or you can get about 10 lines of C, no problem, but I do not think that should be merged to Linus.
> > > btw., how far are you from having a working prototype? > > > > SCSI/SATA issues stop me just now, but even if I get that to work, it > > will be extremely disgusting hack... and it is unclear how to do it > > nicely :-(. > > as long as the sleep periods are within say 10-20 seconds, and our s2ram > cycle is fast and optimal enough, we could do this with networking > enabled too, without dropping/stalling TCP connections left and > right.
I do not think TCP would survive "10 seconds sleep, 1 second up". But...
> (Perhaps if we could notify routers that they should batch packets for N > seconds and we could turn off PHY during that time, it would be even > nicer - is there any such router extension in existence?)
...yes, we should probably play with the routers.
> but if it's nothing else but a s2ram debug/stress utility, that alone > would be great too :-)
I expect to stress s2ram way too much ;-). Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
| |