Re: does swsusp suck after resume for you? [was Re: Faster resuming of suspend technology.]

Con Kolivas
2006-03-14T21:46:00Z

On Wednesday 15 March 2006 05:06, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday 13 March 2006 13:03, Con Kolivas wrote:
> > @@ -269,5 +270,6 @@ int swsusp_resume(void)
> > touch_softlockup_watchdog();
> > device_power_up();
> > local_irq_enable();
> > + post_resume_swap_prefetch();
> > return error;
> > }
>
> Hm, this code is only executed if there's an error during resume. You
> should have placed the post_resume_swap_prefetch() call in
> swsusp_suspend(). :-)

Gee you guys are fussy. You want the code to actually do what it's advertised
to do?

Anyway perhaps it was ordinary swap prefetch that was making the difference
after all. I think I'll let the current swap prefetch code settle for a while
before touching this just yet.

Cheers,
Con