Re: [linux-pm] sleepy linux self-test
- From: Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2008 23:48:31 +0100
Hi!
The changes look good to me.
They feel unfinished to me though. :)
Like using "jiffies" instead of a clocksource, which makes trouble
since the timing covers periods with IRQs disabled. And the test
mode parameter needs work.
Well, I'd say that timing has bigger problem, right?
It is
set alarm
suspend system
| poweroff
alarm expires
system resumes
... so you are measuring resume time + sleep time, no?
Well, it would be nice to have this feature in as soon as reasonably possible,
so that people can include suspend tests in the automated testing.
Except ... "rtcwake" (from util-linux-ng) already supports such
testing, albeit from userspace. But not the timing tests.
What was the rationale for wanting this done in-kernel? (Other
than to know it can work portably.)
Ingo has to answer this one...
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [linux-pm] sleepy linux self-test
- From: David Brownell
- Re: [linux-pm] sleepy linux self-test
- References:
- Re: [linux-pm] sleepy linux self-test
- From: Rafael J. Wysocki
- Re: [linux-pm] sleepy linux self-test
- From: David Brownell
- Re: [linux-pm] sleepy linux self-test
- From: Rafael J. Wysocki
- Re: [linux-pm] sleepy linux self-test
- From: David Brownell
- Re: [linux-pm] sleepy linux self-test
- Prev by Date: Re: [linux-pm] sleepy linux self-test
- Next by Date: locking api self-test hanging
- Previous by thread: Re: [linux-pm] sleepy linux self-test
- Next by thread: Re: [linux-pm] sleepy linux self-test
- Index(es):