Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2013 18:16:25 -0700
From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Yanmin Zhang <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>, shuox.liu@intel.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, pavel@ucw.cz,
        len.brown@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Run callback of device_prepare/complete consistently
Message-ID: <20130608011625.GB2819@kroah.com>
References: <1370593232-3602-1-git-send-email-shuox.liu@intel.com>
 <2482951.doztFClhed@vostro.rjw.lan>
 <1370652132.4432.68.camel@ymzhang.sh.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1370652132.4432.68.camel@ymzhang.sh.intel.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1672
Lines: 32

On Sat, Jun 08, 2013 at 08:42:12AM +0800, Yanmin Zhang wrote:
> 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.

But initcall information is for initialization stuff, not suspend/resume
things, right?  Doesn't the existing tools for parsing this choke if it
sees the information at suspend/resume time?

greg k-h
--
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/