Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756445Ab3FHAkJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Jun 2013 20:40:09 -0400 Received: from mga03.intel.com ([143.182.124.21]:27090 "EHLO mga03.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752999Ab3FHAkH (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Jun 2013 20:40:07 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,825,1363158000"; d="scan'208";a="313981868" Message-ID: <1370652132.4432.68.camel@ymzhang.sh.intel.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Run callback of device_prepare/complete consistently From: Yanmin Zhang Reply-To: yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: shuox.liu@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, pavel@ucw.cz, len.brown@intel.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2013 08:42:12 +0800 In-Reply-To: <2482951.doztFClhed@vostro.rjw.lan> References: <1370593232-3602-1-git-send-email-shuox.liu@intel.com> <2482951.doztFClhed@vostro.rjw.lan> Organization: Intel. Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1387 Lines: 30 On Fri, 2013-06-07 at 12:36 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Friday, June 07, 2013 04:20:30 PM shuox.liu@intel.com wrote: > > dpm_run_callback is used in other stages of power states changing. > > It provides debug info message and time measurement when call these > > callback. We also want to benefit ->prepare and ->complete. > > > > [PATCH 1/2] PM: use dpm_run_callback in device_prepare > > [PATCH 2/2] PM: add dpm_run_callback_void and use it in device_complete > > Is this an "Oh, why don't we do that?" series, or is it useful for anything > in practice? I'm asking, because we haven't added that stuff to start with > since we didn't see why it would be useful to anyone. > > And while patch [1/2] reduces the code size (by 1 line), so I can see some > (tiny) benefit from applying it, patch [2/2] adds more code and is there any > paractical reason? Sometimes, suspend-to-ram path spends too much time (either suspend slowly or wakeup slowly) and we need optimize it. With the 2 patches, we could collect initcall_debug printk info and manually check what prepare/complete callbacks consume too much time. Thanks, Yanmin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/