Hi, After the Dmitry's suggestion to use PSMOUSE_CMD_RESET_DIS during suspend (and analogously for atkbd), I found that it reduced the suspend time significantly and changed the picture quite a bit. For this reason I re-ran the async suspend and resume tests on the nx6325 and Wind U100. This time I marked the following devices as "async": - all USB devices (including interfaces and endpoints) - ACPI battery - sd and its parent - serio and i8042 - all PCI devices (including bridges) for all tests (except for the sync suspend/resume test). The results are as follows (all times in milliseconds): HP nx6325 MSI Wind U100 sync suspend 1391 (+/- 32) 703 (+/- 26) sync resume 3027 (+/- 6) 3562 (+/- 25) async suspend 1306 (+/- 66) 659 (+/- 22) async resume 2809 (+/- 250) 3564 (+/- 35) async "upfront" suspend 1038 (+/- 46) 564 (+/- 50) async "upfront" resume 1783 (+/- 7) 1925 (+/- 41) where the "upfront" versions are with all of the async threads started in an additional loop over dpm_list before the main "sync" suspend/resume loop. The raw data are at: http://www.sisk.pl/kernel/data/async-suspend-new.pdf http://www.sisk.pl/kernel/data/nx6325/ http://www.sisk.pl/kernel/data/wind/ (hopefully this time I didn't make mistakes in the file names). The data seem to suggest that "normal" async suspend and resume may be a little (10% - 20%) faster than sync suspend and resume, but not as much as the versions where all of the async threads had been started before the main suspend (resume) thread began handling the "sync" devices. IMO it also is worth noting that the "async upfront suspend" time on the Wind is pretty close to the suspend time of the slowest device (~ .5 s). The same applies to the "async upfront resume" time on the Wind (the slowest device resumes in ~1.5 s) and the "async upfront suspend" time on the nx6325 (the slowest device suspends in ~1 s). So, it looks like with the above set of async devices we can approach pretty close to the achievable limit on both test boxes. I'm not sure what the next step should be at this point. To me, the picture is quite clear now, but perhaps we ought to run more tests on some other machines or something. Please let me know what you think. Rafael -- 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
