Re: [Query] Preemption (hogging) of the work handler

[Viresh Kumar]

On 14-07-16, 10:32, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> it wouldn't really, this silly question was not directly related to the
> deadlock we are discussing here but to Viresh's argument that later stages
> of suspending/hibernation seem to printk many messages in sync mode. so I
> thought that there might be a small benefit in suspending consoles later,
> as far as I understand, Viresh has `no_console_suspend' anyway. other

That option is enabled only for testing though :)

> than that, I tend to stick to the approach of switching to sync mode from
> suspend_console().

I actually need to test it out as well :)

-- 
viresh