[lkml]   [2009]   [Dec]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Async suspend-resume patch w/ completions (was: Re: Async suspend-resume patch w/ rwsems)

On Sat, 12 Dec 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> One solution that we have discussed on linux-pm is to start a bunch of async
> threads searching for async devices that can be suspended and suspending
> them (assuming suspend is considered) out of order with respect to dpm_list.

Ok, guys, stop the crazy.

That's another of those "ok, that's just ttoally stupid and clearly too
complex" ideas that I would never pull.

I should seriously suggest that people just stop discussing architectural
details on the pm list if they all end up being this level of crazy.

The sane thing to do is to just totally ignore the async layer on PCI
bridges and other things that only have a late-suspend/early-resume thing.
No need for the above kind of obviously idiotic crap.

However, my point was really that we wouldn't even have _needed_ that kind
of special case if we had just decided to let the subsystems do it. But
whatever. At worst, the PCI layer can even just mark such devices with
just late/early suspend/resume as being asynchronous, even though that
ends up resulting in some totally pointless async work that doesn't do

But please guys - reign in the crazy ideas on the pm list. It's not like
our suspend/resume has gotten so stable as to be boring, and we want it to
become unreliable again.


 \ /
  Last update: 2009-12-14 19:25    [W:0.297 / U:0.016 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site