On Monday, June 15, 2015 01:32:00 PM Fu, Zhonghui wrote: > > On 2015/5/28 22:43, Fu, Zhonghui wrote: > > > > On 2015/5/21 9:16, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >> On Wednesday, May 20, 2015 04:50:13 PM Fu, Zhonghui wrote: > >>> On 2015/5/16 8:45, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
[cut] > >>>> Won't this serialize the whole thing again? > >>> Yes, this mutex lock will ultimately serialize all PM operations. But, > >>> all device's PM operations are asynchronous each other at first. So, the > >>> PM operation order of all devices will vary in multiple suspend/resume. > >>> This can be similar to real to an extreme, and helpful to debugging. > >> I see. You're saying that callbacks will be serialized, but if they > >> originally > >> would be asynchronous with respect to each other (they may run in parallel > >> IOW), > >> their respective ordering may vary between suspend-resume cycles. > >> > >> The class of bugs you can catch this way is quite limited and the change is > >> rather intrusive, so I'm with Pavel on that. > > Sorry for late reply. > > > > Although the improvement to PM-trace is limited, I still think it is > > helpful for debugging some special suspend/resume bugs. > > Hi Rafael, > > This patch will not be merged into mainline kernel, right? No, it won't. At least for now, the case for it is not convincing enough. Thanks, Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
