From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Wilson Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] drm/i915: don't block resume on fb console resume Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 10:26:38 +0100 Message-ID: References: <1350267038-3599-1-git-send-email-jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7467A9E8BC for ; Mon, 15 Oct 2012 02:26:55 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1350267038-3599-1-git-send-email-jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org To: Jesse Barnes , intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org On Sun, 14 Oct 2012 19:10:36 -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote: > The console lock can be contended, so rather than prevent other drivers > after us from being held up, queue the console suspend into the global > work queue that can happen anytime. I've measured this to take around > 200ms on my T420. Combined with the ring freq/turbo change, we should > save almost 1/2 a second on resume. In gneral it looks like the first couple of patches are reflections of the async-domains work, and would probably be better if we looked more closely to integrating into that async init/resume infrastructure. The first patches floating around were to offload attaching inteldrmfb to a separate thread. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre