mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@hp.com>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Cc: Alan Jenkins <alan-jenkins@tuffmail.co.uk>,
	linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
	"linux-kernel" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Kernel Testers List <kernel-testers@vger.kernel.org>,
	Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [BISECTED] EEE PC hangs when booting off battery
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 09:48:36 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200904140948.37633.bjorn.helgaas@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090414081728.10de978a@infradead.org>

On Tuesday 14 April 2009 09:17:28 am Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 08:59:01 -0600
> Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@hp.com> wrote:
> 
> > I can't help with the real problem of why the asynchronous battery
> > init causes the hang.
> 
> that got fixed already for the module case.

But apparently still broken for the builtin case?  I think Alan is
running pretty new bits -- he said "latest git" on April 11.

> > But I do object to the magic makefile ordering change in that commit.
> > Nobody reading the makefile can tell why battery is down at the end,
> > and moving it apparently slows down boot significantly. 
> 
> for all cases I've seen it actually speeds it up, because the battery
> now runs concurrently with the disk probe.

I understand; I just meant that if somebody moves it back where it
was, we'll mysteriously lose the speedup you got.  Maybe a comment
in the makefile would be a short-term solution.

> > So the
> > ordering change just feels like a band-aid that covers up a place
> > where ACPI could be improved.
> 
> the reason for the move is that both the battery and other pieces take
> the big acpi lock; which defeats the parallelism. So the battery needs
> to happen at the end instead.

Yep.  But I don't think it's anything about the Linux battery driver
itself that makes it slow.  I think it's more likely that some of the
ACPI methods it executes happen to be slow.  And that could afflict
*any* driver, depending on the whim of a BIOS writer.

My guess is that if we could run ACPI methods concurrently and avoid
that big lock, the ordering wouldn't matter.  I know we probably can't
do that any time soon, but I think it's good to make the problem
visible at least with a "we need this magic order because ACPI doesn't
support concurrent method execution" sort of comment.

Bjorn

  parent reply	other threads:[~2009-04-14 15:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-04-11  9:41 Regression: " Alan Jenkins
2009-04-11 18:07 ` Tzy-Jye Daniel Lin
2009-04-12  9:00   ` Alan Jenkins
2009-04-12 13:11     ` [BISECTED] " Alan Jenkins
2009-04-13 19:15       ` Bjorn Helgaas
2009-04-13 19:57         ` Alan Jenkins
2009-04-13 22:28           ` Bjorn Helgaas
2009-04-14  8:06             ` Alan Jenkins
2009-04-14  9:26               ` Alan Jenkins
2009-04-14 14:59                 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2009-04-14 15:17                   ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-04-14 15:37                     ` Alan Jenkins
2009-04-14 15:48                     ` Bjorn Helgaas [this message]
2009-04-14 15:55                       ` Moore, Robert
2009-04-14 16:56                         ` Bjorn Helgaas
2009-04-14 17:22                           ` Moore, Robert
2009-04-14 17:28                             ` Alan Jenkins
2009-04-15 15:38                           ` Len Brown
2009-04-15 14:32                       ` [FIXED] " Alan Jenkins
2009-04-22 12:17                         ` Alan Jenkins
2009-04-26 11:34                           ` Alan Jenkins
2009-04-28  9:19                             ` [PATCH] [RFC] " Alan Jenkins
2009-04-28  9:58                               ` Johannes Berg
2009-04-28 10:27                                 ` Alan Jenkins
2009-04-28 10:35                                   ` Johannes Berg
2009-04-29 11:14                                   ` Alan Jenkins
2009-04-29 11:20                                     ` Johannes Berg
2009-05-15 21:48                                     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-16  8:39                                       ` Alan Jenkins
2009-04-14  5:03           ` [BISECTED] " Ben Gamari
2009-04-15 15:41             ` Len Brown
2009-04-11 19:40 ` Regression: " Kristoffer Ericson
2009-04-12  9:22   ` Alan Jenkins
2009-04-15 15:49     ` archlinux 2.6.28 ac oops (was Re: Regression: EEE PC hangs when booting off battery) Len Brown

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=200904140948.37633.bjorn.helgaas@hp.com \
    --to=bjorn.helgaas@hp.com \
    --cc=alan-jenkins@tuffmail.co.uk \
    --cc=arjan@infradead.org \
    --cc=kernel-testers@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®