Re: [patch] x86: avoid unnecessary smp alternatives switch duringsuspend/resume

[Suresh Siddha]

On Sun, 2011-01-02 at 01:11 -0800, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > > We have a few others things that want to modify their behaviour
> > > according to whether we're doing the atomic copy/restore. Perhaps it
> > > would be an idea to just use a single flag, perhaps a value for
> > > system_state?
> > 
> > I agree, it would be nicer if we don't introduce a special flag
> > just for that. Other than that, I like all sane code that speeds up
> > suspend/resume :). I've attached before/after dmesg excerpts on my
> > system with the patch ontop of v2.6.37-rc2-181-gb86db47. We end up
> > saving 11601 ??secs according to CONFIG_PRINTK_TIME but hey, the code is
> > simple enough :).
> 
> 11msec is not worth the uglyness of global variable like this. Should
> we get a parameter, or something?

Pavel, Latest patch (that is now in -tip) moved the global variable to
the x86 code.

http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=129236179019935&w=2

thanks,
suresh

--
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/