[lkml]   [2008]   [Jan]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC] sleepy linux
> > > 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 ;-).
(cesky, pictures)

 \ /
  Last update: 2008-01-08 20:17    [W:0.057 / U:1.568 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site