Re: [PATCH 2/6] PM: Asynchronous resume of devices

[Alan Stern]

On Sat, 29 Aug 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:

> I only wanted to say that the advantage is not really that "big". :-)
> 
> > I must agree, 14 threads isn't a lot.  But at the moment that number is 
> > random, not under your control.
> 
> It's not directly controlled, but there are some interactions between the
> async threads, the main threads and the async framework that don't allow this
> number to grow too much.
> 
> IMO it sometimes is better to allow things to work themselves out, as long as
> they don't explode, than to try to keep everything under strict control.  YMMV.

For testing purposes it would be nice to have a one-line summary for
each device containing a thread ID, start timestamp, end timestamp, and
elapsed time.  With that information you could evaluate the amount of
parallelism and determine where the bottlenecks are.  It would give a
much more detailed picture of the entire process than the total time of
your recent patch 9.

Alan Stern


--
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/