Re: Test Patch: 2.5.69 Interrupt Latency

Paul Fulghum (paulkf@microgate.com)
16 May 2003 13:31:40 -0500

On Fri, 2003-05-16 at 12:48, Paul Fulghum wrote:
> So always allowing suspend, and selectively doing the
> wakeup will cause:
> 1. thrashing for case of one port OC,
> other port OK with attached device.
> 2. prevent port with OC from doing resume
> after clearing OC condition.
>
> For the case of all ports hardwired OC, this
> will work because you suspend the whole controller
> and never get a valid resume.

Just to add another argument to disallowing suspend
instead of qualifying wakeup:

In 99% of cases, with no OC, this won't come into play.
In .9% of cases, with transient OC, this won't delay suspend long.
In .01% of cases, with all hardwired OC ports, suspend does not matter.

Plus it cures the above problems #1 and #2.

If problem #1 occurs, I don't see that thrashing is
any better than not suspending at all.

-- 
Paul Fulghum
paulkf@microgate.com


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