Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757525Ab3FHBVB (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Jun 2013 21:21:01 -0400 Received: from hydra.sisk.pl ([212.160.235.94]:59788 "EHLO hydra.sisk.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756633Ab3FHBVA (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Jun 2013 21:21:00 -0400 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: Greg KH Cc: Yanmin Zhang , 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 Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2013 03:30:07 +0200 Message-ID: <4500200.LnlZUcN9aW@vostro.rjw.lan> User-Agent: KMail/4.9.5 (Linux/3.10.0-rc4+; KDE/4.9.5; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20130608011625.GB2819@kroah.com> References: <1370593232-3602-1-git-send-email-shuox.liu@intel.com> <1370652132.4432.68.camel@ymzhang.sh.intel.com> <20130608011625.GB2819@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2176 Lines: 48 On Friday, June 07, 2013 06:16:25 PM Greg KH wrote: > 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? We've been using that for suspend/resume for quite some time too, but not for the prepare/complete phases (because we still believe that's not really useful for them). Well, I'll be handling patches changing code under drivers/base/power, I promise. :-) I've been doing that for quite a few years now ... Thanks, Rafael -- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center. -- 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/