* Re: [PATCH 0/8] device async action mechanism
2009-07-15 7:38 [PATCH 0/8] device async action mechanism Zhang Rui
@ 2009-07-15 0:29 ` Pavel Machek
2009-07-17 1:40 ` Zhang Rui
2009-07-15 10:41 ` Andi Kleen
1 sibling, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Machek @ 2009-07-15 0:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zhang Rui
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-pm, linux-acpi, Len Brown,
Rafael J. Wysocki, Van De Ven, Arjan
Hi!
I notice you are still ccing my @suse.cz address. That one no longer
works :-(.
> this is the patch set I made to speed up the device
> suspend/resume/shutdown process.
>
> A new mechanism called Device Async Actions is introduced in this patch set.
> The basic idea is that,
> 1. device declares to support certain kinds of device async action,
> like suspend, resume, shutdown, etc.
> 2. a async domain is create for this device
> 3. the child device inherits the async domain
> 4. devices in the same domain suspend/resume/shutdown asynchronously with
> the other devices.
>
> Currently, in order to make sure that it won't bring any side effects,
> I only convert the ACPI battery and i8042 to use this framework, which reduces
> 0.5s+ S3 time(suspend time plus resume time)???, from 7.0s to less than 6.5s.
> and about 0.5s shutdown time in my test.
Hmm, 7seconds is still quite long. What hw is that?
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 0/8] device async action mechanism
@ 2009-07-15 7:38 Zhang Rui
2009-07-15 0:29 ` Pavel Machek
2009-07-15 10:41 ` Andi Kleen
0 siblings, 2 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Zhang Rui @ 2009-07-15 7:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-pm, linux-acpi
Cc: Len Brown, Pavel Machek, Rafael J. Wysocki, Van De Ven, Arjan,
Zhang, Rui
Hi,
this is the patch set I made to speed up the device
suspend/resume/shutdown process.
A new mechanism called Device Async Actions is introduced in this patch set.
The basic idea is that,
1. device declares to support certain kinds of device async action,
like suspend, resume, shutdown, etc.
2. a async domain is create for this device
3. the child device inherits the async domain
4. devices in the same domain suspend/resume/shutdown asynchronously with
the other devices.
Currently, in order to make sure that it won't bring any side effects,
I only convert the ACPI battery and i8042 to use this framework, which reduces
0.5s+ S3 time(suspend time plus resume time), from 7.0s to less than 6.5s.
and about 0.5s shutdown time in my test.
Any comments are welcome. :)
thanks,
rui
drivers/acpi/battery.c | 13 +++
drivers/base/Makefile | 3 +-
drivers/base/async_dev.c | 210 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
drivers/base/core.c | 16 +++-
drivers/base/power/main.c | 10 ++-
drivers/input/serio/i8042.c | 10 ++-
include/linux/async.h | 3 +
include/linux/async_dev.h | 45 +++++++++
include/linux/device.h | 2 +
9 files changed, 306 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/8] device async action mechanism
2009-07-15 7:38 [PATCH 0/8] device async action mechanism Zhang Rui
2009-07-15 0:29 ` Pavel Machek
@ 2009-07-15 10:41 ` Andi Kleen
2009-07-16 2:14 ` Zhang Rui
1 sibling, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Andi Kleen @ 2009-07-15 10:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zhang Rui
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-pm, linux-acpi, Len Brown,
Pavel Machek, Rafael J. Wysocki, Van De Ven, Arjan
Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com> writes:
>
> Currently, in order to make sure that it won't bring any side effects,
> I only convert the ACPI battery and i8042 to use this framework, which reduces
> 0.5s+ S3 time(suspend time plus resume time), from 7.0s to less than 6.5s.
10.5s+ was intended I guess?
-Andi
--
ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/8] device async action mechanism
2009-07-15 10:41 ` Andi Kleen
@ 2009-07-16 2:14 ` Zhang Rui
2009-07-16 8:07 ` Andi Kleen
2009-07-16 11:40 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
0 siblings, 2 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Zhang Rui @ 2009-07-16 2:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andi Kleen
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-pm, linux-acpi, Len Brown, arjan,
Van De Ven, Arjan
On Wed, 2009-07-15 at 18:41 +0800, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com> writes:
> >
> > Currently, in order to make sure that it won't bring any side effects,
> > I only convert the ACPI battery and i8042 to use this framework, which reduces
> > 0.5s+ S3 time(suspend time plus resume time), from 7.0s to less than 6.5s.
>
> 10.5s+ was intended I guess?
>
what do you mean?
the kernel device suspend time is reduced from 3.2s to 2.8s after
applying this patch set in my test box.
And I get more optimistic numbers on another laptop, an Eeepc 901,
from about 2s to 1.6s. And the shutdown time is also reduced 0.4s.
thanks,
rui
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/8] device async action mechanism
2009-07-16 2:14 ` Zhang Rui
@ 2009-07-16 8:07 ` Andi Kleen
2009-07-16 8:30 ` Zhang Rui
2009-07-16 11:40 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
1 sibling, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Andi Kleen @ 2009-07-16 8:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zhang Rui
Cc: Andi Kleen, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-pm, linux-acpi,
Len Brown, arjan, Van De Ven, Arjan
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 10:14:43AM +0800, Zhang Rui wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-07-15 at 18:41 +0800, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com> writes:
> > >
> > > Currently, in order to make sure that it won't bring any side effects,
> > > I only convert the ACPI battery and i8042 to use this framework, which reduces
> > > 0.5s+ S3 time(suspend time plus resume time), from 7.0s to less than 6.5s.
> >
> > 10.5s+ was intended I guess?
> >
> what do you mean?
I am confused by you writing
"reduces <small number> from <much larger number> to <still larger number>"
So I assumed you dropped a decimal on <small number>
>
> the kernel device suspend time is reduced from 3.2s to 2.8s after
> applying this patch set in my test box.
> And I get more optimistic numbers on another laptop, an Eeepc 901,
> from about 2s to 1.6s. And the shutdown time is also reduced 0.4s.
I think I am still confused by your numbers.
How do the 0.5s and the 7.0s relate?
-Andi
--
ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/8] device async action mechanism
2009-07-16 8:07 ` Andi Kleen
@ 2009-07-16 8:30 ` Zhang Rui
0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Zhang Rui @ 2009-07-16 8:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andi Kleen
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-pm, linux-acpi, Len Brown,
arjan@linux.intel.com, Van De Ven, Arjan
On Thu, 2009-07-16 at 16:07 +0800, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 10:14:43AM +0800, Zhang Rui wrote:
> > On Wed, 2009-07-15 at 18:41 +0800, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com> writes:
> > > >
> > > > Currently, in order to make sure that it won't bring any side effects,
> > > > I only convert the ACPI battery and i8042 to use this framework, which reduces
> > > > 0.5s+ S3 time(suspend time plus resume time), from 7.0s to less than 6.5s.
> > >
> > > 10.5s+ was intended I guess?
> > >
> > what do you mean?
>
> I am confused by you writing
>
> "reduces <small number> from <much larger number> to <still larger number>"
>
> So I assumed you dropped a decimal on <small number>
>
sorry for my poor English.
I mean the total S3 time (including kernel suspend and kernel resume)
reduces more than 0.5 second.
it takes 7.0s without this patch set and now it takes only 6.5s.
thanks,
rui
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/8] device async action mechanism
2009-07-16 2:14 ` Zhang Rui
2009-07-16 8:07 ` Andi Kleen
@ 2009-07-16 11:40 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2009-07-16 13:45 ` Arjan van de Ven
1 sibling, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh @ 2009-07-16 11:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zhang Rui
Cc: Andi Kleen, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-pm, linux-acpi,
Len Brown, arjan, Van De Ven, Arjan
On Thu, 16 Jul 2009, Zhang Rui wrote:
> the kernel device suspend time is reduced from 3.2s to 2.8s after
> applying this patch set in my test box.
It will give even a bigger boot time saving on ThinkPads, where there is a
Synaptics (or ALPS if you are unlucky) touchpad with the trackpoint behind
it... it takes about 2s to init both devices here. That's two seconds of
boot time you can shove off if it is being initialized assyncronously :-)
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
Henrique Holschuh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/8] device async action mechanism
2009-07-16 11:40 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
@ 2009-07-16 13:45 ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-07-16 14:36 ` Fabio Comolli
2009-07-17 1:37 ` Zhang Rui
0 siblings, 2 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Arjan van de Ven @ 2009-07-16 13:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
Cc: Zhang Rui, Andi Kleen, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-pm,
linux-acpi, Len Brown
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Jul 2009, Zhang Rui wrote:
>> the kernel device suspend time is reduced from 3.2s to 2.8s after
>> applying this patch set in my test box.
>
> It will give even a bigger boot time saving on ThinkPads, where there is a
> Synaptics (or ALPS if you are unlucky) touchpad with the trackpoint behind
> it... it takes about 2s to init both devices here. That's two seconds of
> boot time you can shove off if it is being initialized assyncronously :-)
>
that's a different problem that I don't think this will solve; as long
as you keep the boot of the kernel wait for all async actions, you're going
to hit that wait. In Moblin we have a (bad) patch to not do the wait,
at some point we need to figure how to get a mainline-able patch....
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/8] device async action mechanism
2009-07-16 13:45 ` Arjan van de Ven
@ 2009-07-16 14:36 ` Fabio Comolli
2009-07-17 1:37 ` Zhang Rui
1 sibling, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Fabio Comolli @ 2009-07-16 14:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Arjan van de Ven
Cc: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh, Zhang Rui, Andi Kleen,
Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-pm, linux-acpi, Len Brown
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 3:45 PM, Arjan van de Ven<arjan@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 16 Jul 2009, Zhang Rui wrote:
>>>
>>> the kernel device suspend time is reduced from 3.2s to 2.8s after
>>> applying this patch set in my test box.
>>
>> It will give even a bigger boot time saving on ThinkPads, where there is a
>> Synaptics (or ALPS if you are unlucky) touchpad with the trackpoint behind
>> it... it takes about 2s to init both devices here. That's two seconds of
>> boot time you can shove off if it is being initialized assyncronously :-)
>>
>
> that's a different problem that I don't think this will solve; as long
> as you keep the boot of the kernel wait for all async actions, you're going
> to hit that wait. In Moblin we have a (bad) patch to not do the wait,
> at some point we need to figure how to get a mainline-able patch....
> --
Is it possible for you to post that patch (or point to a website hosting it)?
> 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/
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/8] device async action mechanism
2009-07-16 13:45 ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-07-16 14:36 ` Fabio Comolli
@ 2009-07-17 1:37 ` Zhang Rui
1 sibling, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Zhang Rui @ 2009-07-17 1:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Arjan van de Ven
Cc: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh, Andi Kleen,
Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-pm, linux-acpi, Len Brown
On Thu, 2009-07-16 at 21:45 +0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > On Thu, 16 Jul 2009, Zhang Rui wrote:
> >> the kernel device suspend time is reduced from 3.2s to 2.8s after
> >> applying this patch set in my test box.
> >
> > It will give even a bigger boot time saving on ThinkPads, where there is a
> > Synaptics (or ALPS if you are unlucky) touchpad with the trackpoint behind
> > it... it takes about 2s to init both devices here. That's two seconds of
> > boot time you can shove off if it is being initialized assyncronously :-)
> >
>
> that's a different problem that I don't think this will solve;
right.
we are not able to get an async device group during initialization.
thanks,
rui
> as long
> as you keep the boot of the kernel wait for all async actions, you're going
> to hit that wait. In Moblin we have a (bad) patch to not do the wait,
> at some point we need to figure how to get a mainline-able patch....
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/8] device async action mechanism
2009-07-15 0:29 ` Pavel Machek
@ 2009-07-17 1:40 ` Zhang Rui
0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Zhang Rui @ 2009-07-17 1:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pavel Machek
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-pm, linux-acpi, Len Brown,
Rafael J. Wysocki, Arjan van de Ven
On Wed, 2009-07-15 at 08:29 +0800, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I notice you are still ccing my @suse.cz address. That one no longer
> works :-(.
>
> > this is the patch set I made to speed up the device
> > suspend/resume/shutdown process.
> >
> > A new mechanism called Device Async Actions is introduced in this patch set.
> > The basic idea is that,
> > 1. device declares to support certain kinds of device async action,
> > like suspend, resume, shutdown, etc.
> > 2. a async domain is create for this device
> > 3. the child device inherits the async domain
> > 4. devices in the same domain suspend/resume/shutdown asynchronously with
> > the other devices.
> >
> > Currently, in order to make sure that it won't bring any side effects,
> > I only convert the ACPI battery and i8042 to use this framework, which reduces
> > 0.5s+ S3 time(suspend time plus resume time)???, from 7.0s to less than 6.5s.
> > and about 0.5s shutdown time in my test.
>
> Hmm, 7seconds is still quite long. What hw is that?
>
7 seconds including both kernel suspend and resume time.
it takes about 3.2s to suspend and 3.8 seconds to resume.
thanks,
rui
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-07-17 1:39 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2009-07-15 7:38 [PATCH 0/8] device async action mechanism Zhang Rui
2009-07-15 0:29 ` Pavel Machek
2009-07-17 1:40 ` Zhang Rui
2009-07-15 10:41 ` Andi Kleen
2009-07-16 2:14 ` Zhang Rui
2009-07-16 8:07 ` Andi Kleen
2009-07-16 8:30 ` Zhang Rui
2009-07-16 11:40 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2009-07-16 13:45 ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-07-16 14:36 ` Fabio Comolli
2009-07-17 1:37 ` Zhang Rui
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).