* Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Monday 31 August 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > On Sunday 30 August 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > On Sunday 30 August 2009, Alan Stern wrote: > > > > > 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. > > > > > > > > Of course it would. I think I'll implement it. > > > > > > OK, below is a patch for that. It only prints the time elapsed, because the > > > timestamps themselves can be obtained from the usual kernel timestamping. > > > > > > It's on top of all the previous patches. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Rafael > > > > > > --- > > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> > > > Subject: PM: Measure suspend and resume times for individual devices > > > > > > If verbose PM debugging is enabled, measure and print the time of > > > suspending and resuming of individual devices. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > drivers/base/power/main.c | 51 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- > > > kernel/power/swsusp.c | 2 - > > > 2 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > > > > > Index: linux-2.6/drivers/base/power/main.c > > > =================================================================== > > > --- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/base/power/main.c > > > +++ linux-2.6/drivers/base/power/main.c > > > @@ -442,11 +442,11 @@ static bool pm_op_started(struct device > > > */ > > > int pm_time_elapsed(struct timeval *start, struct timeval *stop) > > > { > > > - s64 elapsed_centisecs64; > > > + s64 elapsed_msecs64; > > > > > > - elapsed_centisecs64 = timeval_to_ns(stop) - timeval_to_ns(start); > > > - do_div(elapsed_centisecs64, NSEC_PER_SEC / 100); > > > - return elapsed_centisecs64; > > > + elapsed_msecs64 = timeval_to_ns(stop) - timeval_to_ns(start); > > > + do_div(elapsed_msecs64, NSEC_PER_SEC / 1000); > > > + return elapsed_msecs64; > > > } > > > > > > static char *pm_verb(int event) > > > @@ -476,7 +476,7 @@ static char *pm_verb(int event) > > > static void dpm_show_time(struct timeval *start, struct timeval *stop, > > > pm_message_t state, const char *info) > > > { > > > - int centisecs = pm_time_elapsed(start, stop); > > > + int centisecs = pm_time_elapsed(start, stop) / 10; > > > > > > printk(KERN_INFO "PM: %s%s%s of devices complete in %d.%02d seconds\n", > > > info ? info : "", info ? " " : "", pm_verb(state.event), > > > @@ -497,6 +497,33 @@ static void pm_dev_err(struct device *de > > > kobject_name(&dev->kobj), pm_verb(state.event), info, error); > > > } > > > > > > +#ifdef DEBUG > > > +static void device_show_time(struct timeval *start, struct device *dev, > > > + pm_message_t state, char *info) > > > +{ > > > + struct timeval stop; > > > + int msecs; > > > + > > > + do_gettimeofday(&stop); > > > + msecs = pm_time_elapsed(start, &stop); > > > + dev_dbg(dev, "PID %d: %s%s%s complete in %d.%03d seconds\n", > > > + task_pid_nr(current), info ? info : "", info ? " " : "", > > > + pm_verb(state.event), msecs / 1000, msecs % 1000); > > > +} > > > + > > > +#define TIMER_DECLARE(timer) struct timeval timer > > > +#define TIMER_START(timer) do { \ > > > + do_gettimeofday(&timer); \ > > > + } while (0) > > > +#define TIMER_STOP(timer, dev, state, info) do { \ > > > + device_show_time(&timer, dev, state, info); \ > > > + } while (0) > > > +#else /* !DEBUG */ > > > +#define TIMER_DECLARE(timer) > > > +#define TIMER_START(timer) do { } while (0) > > > +#define TIMER_STOP(timer, dev, state, info) do { } while (0) > > > +#endif /* !DEBUG */ > > > + > > > /*------------------------- Resume routines -------------------------*/ > > > > > > /** > > > @@ -510,7 +537,9 @@ static void pm_dev_err(struct device *de > > > static int __device_resume_noirq(struct device *dev, pm_message_t state) > > > { > > > int error = 0; > > > + TIMER_DECLARE(timer); > > > > > > + TIMER_START(timer); > > > TRACE_DEVICE(dev); > > > TRACE_RESUME(0); > > > > > > @@ -523,6 +552,7 @@ static int __device_resume_noirq(struct > > > wake_up_all(&dev->power.wait_queue); > > > > > > TRACE_RESUME(error); > > > + TIMER_STOP(timer, dev, state, "EARLY"); > > > return error; > > > > Hm, these CPP macros are rather ugly. Why is there a need for > > the TIMER_DECLARE() wrapper - if a proper inline function is > > used there's no need for that. > > I need a variable to be declared so that I can save the "start" > timestamp in it. I don't need the variable if DEBUG is unset, > though. > > How would you do that without using a macro? Or #ifdef #endif > block that would be uglier IMO (which is why I didn't do that)? Well, why not use an inline function like i suggested? [which does nothing in the !enabled case] You can keep the local variable always defined. > > There's other all-capitals macros in that code implementing code > > (and not constants) - is that really justified/clean? > > Do you mean the TRACE_* macros? Please ask Linus about that, they > are from him. :-) hey, Linus is not immune to crap either :) IIRC the TRACE_*() stuff was a quick hack originally to debug some nasty suspend/resume hang. Combined with the DECLARE/START/STOP macros it definitely starts looking a bit ugly. If you find something cleaner looking i doubt Linus will complain. (no biggie if you keep it in place either) Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html