Re: Attempted summary of suspend-blockers LKML thread, take three

[Paul E. McKenney]

On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 11:57:51AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > Think in terms of an ARM laptop. What good is opportunistic suspend if
> > > it's not going to help when the laptop is being used?
> > 
> > For when the laptop is not being used, presumably.
> 
> Or in time between keystrokes for most of the platform (backlight
> excepted). The Intel MID x86 devices are at the point that suspend/resume
> time on x86 is being hurt by the kernel rewriting smp alternatives as we
> go from 2 processors live to 1 and back.

Given that you are talking about going from 2 processors to 1 and back,
I would guess that you are not actually talking about suspend/resume,
which is a system-wide thing rather than a CPU-by-CPU thing.  I am not
sure whether you are using CPU hotplug or invoking SMP alternatives once
all but one CPU is idle.

Can't say that I can tell exactly what pit you are digging for me here.  ;-)

							Thanx, Paul
--
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/