Re: Async resume patch (was: Re: [GIT PULL] PM updates for 2.6.33)

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> > That's partly why I realy did suggest that we do the async stuff purely in 
> > the USB layer, rather than try to put it deeper in the device layer. And 
> > if we do support it "natively" in the device layer like Rafael's latest 
> > patch, I still think we should be very very nervous about making devices 
> > async unless there is a measured - and very noticeable - advantage.
> 
> Agreed.  Arjan's measurements indicated that USB was one of the biggest
> offenders; everything else other than the PS/2 mouse was much faster.  
> Given these results there isn't much incentive to do anything else
> asynchronously.
> 
> (However other devices not present on Arjan's machine may be a
> different story.  Spinning up multiple external disks is a good example 
> -- although here it may be necessary for the driver to take charge, 
> because spinning up a disk requires a lot of power and doing too many 
> of them at the same time could be bad.)

Well, system would better be able to supply enough current... because
usb disks auto-sleep on their own, and then something like async ls -l
/*/* would kill your machine...
								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/