lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Dec]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Async suspend-resume patch w/ completions (was: Re: Async suspend-resume patch w/ rwsems)
    On Tue, 15 Dec 2009, Linus Torvalds wrote:

    > My whole point was that by doing the whole "wait for children" in generic
    > code, you also made devices - such as PCI bridges - have to wait for
    > children, even though they don't need to, and don't want to.
    >
    > So I suggested an admittedly ugly hack to take care of it - rather than
    > some complex infrastructure.

    It doesn't feel like an ugly hack to me. It seems like exactly the
    Right Thing To Do: Make as many devices as possible use async
    suspend/resume.

    The only reason we don't make every device async is because we don't
    know whether it's safe. In the case of PCI bridges we _do_ know --
    because they don't have any work to do outside of
    late_suspend/early_resume -- and so they _should_ be async.

    The same goes for devices that don't have suspend or resume methods.

    There remains a separate question: Should async devices also be forced
    to wait for their children? I don't see why not. For PCI bridges it
    won't make any significant difference. As long as the async code
    doesn't have to do anything, who cares when it runs?

    Alan Stern



    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-12-15 16:59    [W:0.047 / U:0.124 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site