Re: [PATCH] New APM patch for testing

Stephen.Rothwell@canb.auug.org.au
Tue, 22 Jun 1999 00:24:04 +1000


Hi Trever,

Trever Adams <trever_Adams@bigfoot.com> writes:
>
> Well, let me be the first to appologize. I need to do a better job of
> separating my frustrations so that people like you don't get dumped on.
> (Yes, I do have this problem and I am addressing it, just haven't
> totally beaten it yet). I am sorry.

We are none of us perfect :-)

> I will respond to this in reverse order. I can see your point, you gain
> a lot... is it possible to have a #ifdef APM_NO_DEBUG or similar for
> those who have little/no problems when running APM to remove that 140
> bytes of data, the one test, and whatever else is added?

Sure, I will put it in.

> My big worry is this, and yes I know this is insane, but right now where
> the business I work is getting started, any savings helps (and power is
> a big one). Our servers have APM configured as on. Currently the time
> it takes for it to snap back to life is almost nil. I am worried that
> the debug stuff MAY cause some slow down in it comming back to life; in
> going to sleep, I don't really care, take an extra 2 seconds (yes, this
> is exagerated, but literally I wouldn't mind) to fall asleep. Is my
> worry justified about waking up? I don't know what your code and test
> all include.. I suppose I should have read your patch in the first place
> instead of freaking out.

Let me put your mind at rest :-) Your worry is not justified. I doubt
if you could measure the 1 test and branch extra (assuming that you do
not actually enable debugging.

> In light that Linux is supposed to be the land of chosing what is in
> your kernel though, I do ask that you keep these things to a minimum. I
> do see your logi on the debug, still don't like the power off but have
> no problems with a total of what, 12 bytes... but others may.

I have had no other comments either way.

> Again, I appologize for my tone. I hope you will read my thoughts on
> the matter now. I will also go and read your patch to see what I really
> think.

Sould have been a good idea at the start ... ;-)

Cheers,
Stephen

--
Stephen Rothwell                    Stephen.Rothwell@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/