From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: broken suspend (sched related) [Was: 2.6.24-rc4-mm1] Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2007 16:24:47 +0100 Message-ID: <20071208152447.GA30270@elte.hu> References: <20071204211701.994dfce6.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <47595A0A.5000502@gmail.com> <20071207151150.GB24254@elte.hu> <20071207175134.GA18916@elte.hu> <475A5188.6070809@gmail.com> <20071208083939.GD30997@elte.hu> <475A629C.7010408@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <475A629C.7010408@gmail.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Jiri Slaby Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linux-pm mailing list , Andrew Morton , Arjan van de Ven , Thomas Gleixner List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org * Jiri Slaby wrote: > On 12/08/2007 09:39 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Jiri Slaby wrote: > > > >> Unfortunately no change here. > > > > could you try to revert this change: > > > > -int softlockup_thresh = 10; > > +int softlockup_thresh = 60; > > > > i.e. change the value of softlockup_thresh back to 10. You should be > > able to tweak this runtime as well, without patching the kernel: > > > > echo 10 > /proc/sys/kernel/softlockup_thresh > > What should have this changed? I can't see any difference. it changes the wakeup frequency of the softlockup thread. i'm wondering why it had no effect now - the new code is in essence a NOP over what we had. Could you send me your current (modified) kernel/softlockup.c code? Ingo