Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1420058

Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add suspend-to-idle validation for Intel SoCs

From Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add suspend-to-idle validation for Intel SoCs
Date 2016-06-11 22:40 +0200
Message-ID <rIXRf-7IN-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <rFsAh-1gP-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <rHjVU-8cE-25@gated-at.bofh.it> <rHzeh-17I-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


On Tue 2016-06-07 17:07:21, dbasehore . wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 12:46 AM, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> wrote:
> > On Wed 2016-06-01 21:33:24, dbasehore@chromium.org wrote:
> >> From: Derek Basehore <dbasehore@chromium.org>
> >>
> >> This patch set adds support for catching errors when entering freeze
> >> on Intel Skylake SoCs. Support for this can be added to newer SoCs in
> >> later patches.
> >>
> >> Verification is done by waking up the CPU once every X (default 10)
> >> seconds to check the residency of S0ix. This can't be verified before
> >> attempting to enter S0ix through mwait, so we have to repeatedly
> >> verify entry into that state. Successfully entering S0ix is no
> >> guarantee that it will be entered on the next attempt, so we have to
> >> schedule another check. This has a minimal power impact of <1% of the
> >> total system power on our systems.
> >
> > Dunno. Should this be protected with something like CONFIG_TEST_SLEEP?
> > People probably don't want this for production...
> >
> 
> That depends, if you switch to using suspend to idle instead of
> suspend to RAM, would you rather not catch power bugs due to
> misconfigured hardware in production?

> I agree that it shouldn't be on by default since freeze shouldn't fail
> because some IP on the SoC doesn't have firmware loaded (this happens
> with i915), but I was just going to leave it off by default instead of
> adding yet another config option for a small feature.

I'd rather have testing features optional. In 2 years, hopefully the
drivers are debugged, and people can set this to off...

									Pavel


-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

[PATCH 0/5] Add suspend-to-idle validation for Intel SoCs dbasehore@chromium.org - 2016-06-02 06:40 +0200
  Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add suspend-to-idle validation for Intel SoCs Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> - 2016-06-07 09:50 +0200
    Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add suspend-to-idle validation for Intel SoCs "dbasehore ." <dbasehore@chromium.org> - 2016-06-08 02:10 +0200
      Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add suspend-to-idle validation for Intel SoCs Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> - 2016-06-11 22:40 +0200

csiph-web