Hi, > > The result is a potential performance gain during freeze, since less > > tasks have to be awaken. > > I'm curious did you try the freezing process and see if pointless wakeups are > reduced? That would be an added bonus if you did.
Test env: fresh Debian QEMU vm with 4.19 stable kernel.
Test process:
- Added two debug logs to freeze_task:
bool freeze_task(struct task_struct *p)
{
unsigned long flags;
[snip]
pr_info("freezing a task");
[snip]
if (freezer_should_skip(p)) {
pr_info("skeeping a task");
return false;
}
[snip]
}
- Triggered manual freeze:
# echo freezer > /sys/power/pm_test
# echo test_resume > /sys/power/disk
# echo disk > /sys/power/state
- grep -c to get the number of "freezing a task" and "skeeping a task"
lines in kern.log.
Results:
Without my patch: 448 calls freeze_task, 12 skipped.
With my patch: 448 calls, 32 skipped.
2.6x more tasks skipped.
Not sure this is the best way to test this patch, though. Any advice?
regards,
Hugo
--
Hugo Lefeuvre (hle) | www.owl.eu.com
RSA4096_ 360B 03B3 BF27 4F4D 7A3F D5E8 14AA 1EB8 A247 3DFD
ed25519_ 37B2 6D38 0B25 B8A2 6B9F 3A65 A36F 5357 5F2D DC4C
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list de...@linuxdriverproject.org http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
