Re: Attempted summary of suspend-blockers LKML thread

david
2010-08-06T22:12:43Z

On Fri, 6 Aug 2010, Paul E. McKenney wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 01:29:57AM -0700, david@lang.hm wrote:
>> On Thu, 5 Aug 2010, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Aug 05, 2010 at 01:26:18PM -0700, david@lang.hm wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 5 Aug 2010, kevin granade wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 10:46 AM, <david@lang.hm> wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 5 Aug 2010, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 10:18:40PM -0700, david@lang.hm wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, 4 Aug 2010, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 05:25:53PM -0700, david@lang.hm wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 4 Aug 2010, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [ . . . ]
>>>>>>>
>>
>> it would be nice to get network traffic/connection stats.
>>
>> so two questions.
>>
>> first, what else would you need to get accumulated for the cgroup
>>
>> second, is there a fairly easy way to have these stats available?
>>
>> for the 'last time it ran' stat, this seems like you could have a
>> per-cpu variable per cgroup that's fairly cheap to update, but you
>> would need to take a global lock to read accuratly (the lock may be
>> expensive enough that it's worth trying to read the variables from
>> the other cpu without a lock, just to see if it's remotely possible
>> to sleep/suspend)
>>
>> with timers, is it possible to have multiple timer wheels (one per
>> cgroup)?
>
> I apologize in advance for what I am about to write, but...
>
> If you continue in this vein, you are likely to make suspend blockers
> look very simple and natural. ;-)

if that's the case then they should be implemented :-)

on the other hand, this may be something that's desirable for
idle-low-power as well.

David Lang