On Wednesday, January 05, 2011, Jean Pihet wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 12:01 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Tuesday, January 04, 2011, Jean Pihet wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > Hi!
> >> >
> >> >> Uses the machine_suspend trace point, called from the
> >> >> generic kernel suspend_enter function.
> >> >>
> >> >> Signed-off-by: Jean Pihet <j-pihet@xxxxxx>
> >> >> CC: Thomas Renninger <trenn@xxxxxxx>
> >> >> ---
> >> >> kernel/power/suspend.c | 3 +++
> >> >> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >> >>
> >> >> diff --git a/kernel/power/suspend.c b/kernel/power/suspend.c
> >> >> index ecf7705..0650596 100644
> >> >> --- a/kernel/power/suspend.c
> >> >> +++ b/kernel/power/suspend.c
> >> >> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
> >> >> #include <linux/mm.h>
> >> >> #include <linux/slab.h>
> >> >> #include <linux/suspend.h>
> >> >> +#include <trace/events/power.h>
> >> >>
> >> >> #include "power.h"
> >> >>
> >> >> @@ -164,7 +165,9 @@ static int suspend_enter(suspend_state_t state)
> >> >> error = sysdev_suspend(PMSG_SUSPEND);
> >> >> if (!error) {
> >> >> if (!suspend_test(TEST_CORE) && pm_check_wakeup_events()) {
> >> >> + trace_machine_suspend(state);
> >> >> error = suspend_ops->enter(state);
> >> >> + trace_machine_suspend(PWR_EVENT_EXIT);
> >> >> events_check_enabled = false;
> >> >> }
> >> >> sysdev_resume();
> >> >
> >> > Ok... why this place?
> >> This trace has been placed here because it traces the machine low
> >> level mode enter.
> >>
> >> > I mean, perhaps suspend time should include
> >> > device suspend?
> >> That makes sense. We have a few options here:
> >> 1) keep the traces as proposed to trace the low level machine code only,
> >> 2) move the traces to the entry and exit of suspend_enter so that it
> >> includes the prepare and late_prepare (+ the associated wake-up)
> >> callbacks as well,
> >> 3) move the traces to suspend_devices_and_enter so that it includes 2)
> >> and the handling of the console and the devices,
> >> 4) move the traces to enter_state do that it includes 3), the call to
> >> sys_sync and the user space freeze.
> >>
> >> Note that the the SNAPSHOT_2RAM ioctl code also calls
> >> suspend_devices_and_enter, so if only 4) is used no trace will be
> >> generated in that case.
> >>
> >> I am in favor of 3) of 4).
> >> What do you think?
> >
> > Why don't we keep the tracepoints as proposed _and_ add two additional
> > tracepoints around device suspend-resume?
> I like the idea but that requires to extend the current API with
> additional suspend tracepoints or device state change tracepoints.
> That can be done once the current API is firmly in place.
> Today the only trace API for suspend is machine_suspend(unsigned int
> state), so I think the best option is 3) here above.
>
> Unless there is an objection I am pushing 3) asap.
Fine by me.
Thanks,
Rafael
_______________________________________________
linux-pm mailing list
linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
