public inbox for linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>,
	linux-pm <linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
	ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>,
	Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>,
	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
	Linux PCI <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10] PM: Measure suspend and resume times for individual devices (was: Re: [PATCH 2/6] PM: Asynchronous resume of devices)
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 14:53:47 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200908311453.47138.rjw@sisk.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090831072545.GA21570@elte.hu>

On Monday 31 August 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> 
> > On Sunday 30 August 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Sunday 30 August 2009, Alan Stern wrote:
> > > > On Sat, 29 Aug 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > I only wanted to say that the advantage is not really that "big". :-)
> > > > > 
> > > > > > I must agree, 14 threads isn't a lot.  But at the moment that number is 
> > > > > > random, not under your control.
> > > > > 
> > > > > It's not directly controlled, but there are some interactions between the
> > > > > async threads, the main threads and the async framework that don't allow this
> > > > > number to grow too much.
> > > > > 
> > > > > IMO it sometimes is better to allow things to work themselves out, as long as
> > > > > they don't explode, than to try to keep everything under strict control.  YMMV.
> > > > 
> > > > For testing purposes it would be nice to have a one-line summary for
> > > > each device containing a thread ID, start timestamp, end timestamp, and
> > > > elapsed time.  With that information you could evaluate the amount of
> > > > parallelism and determine where the bottlenecks are.  It would give a
> > > > much more detailed picture of the entire process than the total time of
> > > > your recent patch 9.
> > > 
> > > Of course it would.  I think I'll implement it.
> > 
> > OK, below is a patch for that.  It only prints the time elapsed, because the
> > timestamps themselves can be obtained from the usual kernel timestamping.
> > 
> > It's on top of all the previous patches.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Rafael
> > 
> > ---
> > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
> > Subject: PM: Measure suspend and resume times for individual devices
> > 
> > If verbose PM debugging is enabled, measure and print the time of
> > suspending and resuming of individual devices.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
> > ---
> >  drivers/base/power/main.c |   51 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> >  kernel/power/swsusp.c     |    2 -
> >  2 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > 
> > Index: linux-2.6/drivers/base/power/main.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/base/power/main.c
> > +++ linux-2.6/drivers/base/power/main.c
> > @@ -442,11 +442,11 @@ static bool pm_op_started(struct device 
> >   */
> >  int pm_time_elapsed(struct timeval *start, struct timeval *stop)
> >  {
> > -	s64 elapsed_centisecs64;
> > +	s64 elapsed_msecs64;
> >  
> > -	elapsed_centisecs64 = timeval_to_ns(stop) - timeval_to_ns(start);
> > -	do_div(elapsed_centisecs64, NSEC_PER_SEC / 100);
> > -	return elapsed_centisecs64;
> > +	elapsed_msecs64 = timeval_to_ns(stop) - timeval_to_ns(start);
> > +	do_div(elapsed_msecs64, NSEC_PER_SEC / 1000);
> > +	return elapsed_msecs64;
> >  }
> >  
> >  static char *pm_verb(int event)
> > @@ -476,7 +476,7 @@ static char *pm_verb(int event)
> >  static void dpm_show_time(struct timeval *start, struct timeval *stop,
> >  			  pm_message_t state, const char *info)
> >  {
> > -	int centisecs = pm_time_elapsed(start, stop);
> > +	int centisecs = pm_time_elapsed(start, stop) / 10;
> >  
> >  	printk(KERN_INFO "PM: %s%s%s of devices complete in %d.%02d seconds\n",
> >  		info ? info : "", info ? " " : "", pm_verb(state.event),
> > @@ -497,6 +497,33 @@ static void pm_dev_err(struct device *de
> >  		kobject_name(&dev->kobj), pm_verb(state.event), info, error);
> >  }
> >  
> > +#ifdef DEBUG
> > +static void device_show_time(struct timeval *start, struct device *dev,
> > +			     pm_message_t state, char *info)
> > +{
> > +	struct timeval stop;
> > +	int msecs;
> > +
> > +	do_gettimeofday(&stop);
> > +	msecs = pm_time_elapsed(start, &stop);
> > +	dev_dbg(dev, "PID %d: %s%s%s complete in %d.%03d seconds\n",
> > +		task_pid_nr(current), info ? info : "", info ? " " : "",
> > +		pm_verb(state.event), msecs / 1000, msecs % 1000);
> > +}
> > +
> > +#define TIMER_DECLARE(timer)	struct timeval timer
> > +#define TIMER_START(timer)	do { \
> > +		do_gettimeofday(&timer); \
> > +	} while (0)
> > +#define TIMER_STOP(timer, dev, state, info)	do { \
> > +		device_show_time(&timer, dev, state, info); \
> > +	} while (0)
> > +#else /* !DEBUG */
> > +#define TIMER_DECLARE(timer)
> > +#define TIMER_START(timer)	do { } while (0)
> > +#define TIMER_STOP(timer, dev, state, info)	do { } while (0)
> > +#endif /* !DEBUG */
> > +
> >  /*------------------------- Resume routines -------------------------*/
> >  
> >  /**
> > @@ -510,7 +537,9 @@ static void pm_dev_err(struct device *de
> >  static int __device_resume_noirq(struct device *dev, pm_message_t state)
> >  {
> >  	int error = 0;
> > +	TIMER_DECLARE(timer);
> >  
> > +	TIMER_START(timer);
> >  	TRACE_DEVICE(dev);
> >  	TRACE_RESUME(0);
> >  
> > @@ -523,6 +552,7 @@ static int __device_resume_noirq(struct 
> >  	wake_up_all(&dev->power.wait_queue);
> >  
> >  	TRACE_RESUME(error);
> > +	TIMER_STOP(timer, dev, state, "EARLY");
> >  	return error;
> 
> Hm, these CPP macros are rather ugly. Why is there a need for the 
> TIMER_DECLARE() wrapper - if a proper inline function is used 
> there's no need for that.

I need a variable to be declared so that I can save the "start" timestamp
in it.  I don't need the variable if DEBUG is unset, though.

How would you do that without using a macro?  Or #ifdef #endif block that
would be uglier IMO (which is why I didn't do that)?

> There's other all-capitals macros in that code implementing code (and not
> constants) - is that really justified/clean?

Do you mean the TRACE_* macros?  Please ask Linus about that, they are from
him. :-)

Thanks,
Rafael

  reply	other threads:[~2009-08-31 12:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-08-26 20:17 [PATCH 0/6] PM: Asynchronous suspend and resume of devices Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-26 20:20 ` [PATCH 1/6] PM: Introduce PM links framework Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-28 15:16   ` Alan Stern
2009-08-28 19:11     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-26 20:21 ` [PATCH 2/6] PM: Asynchronous resume of devices Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-28 15:43   ` Alan Stern
2009-08-28 19:38     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-28 19:59       ` Alan Stern
2009-08-28 22:22         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-28 23:20           ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-29  2:06           ` Alan Stern
2009-08-29 12:49             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-29 19:17               ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-30  0:53                 ` Alan Stern
2009-08-30  0:48               ` Alan Stern
2009-08-30 13:15                 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-30 21:13                   ` [PATCH 10] PM: Measure suspend and resume times for individual devices (was: Re: [PATCH 2/6] PM: Asynchronous resume of devices) Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-31  7:25                     ` Ingo Molnar
2009-08-31 12:53                       ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2009-08-31 13:52                         ` Ingo Molnar
2009-08-31 15:56                           ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-31 21:32                             ` [PATCH 10 update] PM: Measure suspend and resume times for individual devices Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-09-04  7:51                             ` [PATCH 10] PM: Measure suspend and resume times for individual devices (was: Re: [PATCH 2/6] PM: Asynchronous resume of devices) Ingo Molnar
2009-09-04 14:42                               ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-09-04 19:12                                 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-09-04 21:56                                   ` [PATCH 10 update 2x] PM: Measure suspend and resume times for individual devices Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-09-06  4:44                                     ` Ingo Molnar
2009-09-06 12:13                                       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-31 14:09                     ` [PATCH 10] PM: Measure suspend and resume times for individual devices (was: Re: [PATCH 2/6] PM: Asynchronous resume of devices) Alan Stern
2009-08-31 16:00                       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-30  6:45               ` [PATCH 2/6] PM: Asynchronous resume of devices Pavel Machek
2009-08-30 13:09                 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-26 20:21 ` [PATCH 3/6] PM: Asynchronous suspend " Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-26 20:22 ` [PATCH 4/6] PM: Allow PCI devices to suspend/resume asynchronously Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-26 20:23 ` [PATCH 5/6] PM: Allow ACPI " Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-26 20:24 ` [PATCH 6/6] PM: Allow serio input " Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-27 20:08   ` Dmitry Torokhov
2009-08-27 20:58     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-26 22:25 ` [PATCH 0/6] PM: Asynchronous suspend and resume of devices Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-27 19:17   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-27 19:19     ` [PATCH 7] PM: Add a switch for disabling/enabling asynchronous suspend/resume Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-27 20:07       ` Dmitry Torokhov
2009-08-27 22:22         ` [PATCH 7 updated] " Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-28  5:22           ` Dmitry Torokhov
2009-08-28 19:42             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-27 19:20     ` [PATCH 8] PM: Allow user space to change the power.async_suspend flag of devices Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-27 20:04       ` Dmitry Torokhov
2009-08-27 22:24         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-28  7:01           ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-29 19:20             ` [PATCH 8 update] " Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-27 20:46 ` [PATCH 0/6] PM: Asynchronous suspend and resume " Alan Stern
2009-08-27 21:18   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-29 19:22 ` [PATCH 9] PM: Measure device suspend and resume times (was: Re: [PATCH 0/6] PM: Asynchronous suspend and resume of devices) Rafael J. Wysocki

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=200908311453.47138.rjw@sisk.pl \
    --to=rjw@sisk.pl \
    --cc=arjan@infradead.org \
    --cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
    --cc=lenb@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
    --cc=rui.zhang@intel.com \
    --cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox