Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2013 00:35:15 +0300 From: Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org> To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@FreeBSD.org> Cc: "freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org" <freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.org>, FreeBSD Stable Mailing List <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org>, Mike Harding <mvharding@gmail.com> Subject: Re: 9.2-RC3 - suspend/resume causes slow system performance Message-ID: <5223B313.9060708@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <CAJ-VmokHyXaxZTb-3Bpp19Go%2BsW=ms0Zh0WAMB7sD1JSX6HdUw@mail.gmail.com> References: <CALRn2n_2tUc0vPCFpgmAjYRm1=7KB5sA3A%2BxQqcc=ye-S1-0LA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-Vmom970ZBLPLWWTomkKtX1w-Fi3cj5qva1_ODcx22nqEXfA@mail.gmail.com> <CALRn2n9G1%2BBS8KVUc_RFZj-snM3FVJvsEEcnWqv-GF82=CqS6Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-VmomWMhQNU1w0eWdwrKYz2fuZ5xZimgxQWUEkPqaQcgYkjw@mail.gmail.com> <CALRn2n_e2Uu4Y2aHUSP=6_aQDPeCk_OkrCxiFWaD0BxmbgP4-A@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-VmokesYVnYJUnNgULKwL-wqb_-SqqYi=3KUSCGbHNVgOOUw@mail.gmail.com> <5222E19C.9040402@FreeBSD.org> <CAJ-VmokHyXaxZTb-3Bpp19Go%2BsW=ms0Zh0WAMB7sD1JSX6HdUw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
on 01/09/2013 23:40 Adrian Chadd said the following: > On 31 August 2013 23:41, Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org <mailto:avg@freebsd.org>> > wrote: > > > > > I've tracked this down to a single line, details in > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=181632. Basically, the code is > > now doing a 'sti, hlt' vs. a 'sti' in some code that is only supposed > to run > > if idle is disabled. Given that 'hlt' is the idle instruction, this > doesn't > > seem right. > > > > > > Wow, nice! > > > > Avg - can we get this fixed? Or just revert this! > > Thank you for trying to be helpful. But let's not jump to conclusions. > BTW, I am following up on the problem in the PR. > > > Sure, I'd like to know why it's behaving badly. But since we're so close to > 9.2-REL, do you think you can get it sorted out and bug-free on all the existing > platforms that people are using 9.2 on (including server, desktop and laptop) > without reverting it? Do you have any evidence that there is anybody else besides Mike who has this problem? Also, I usually try to "sort out" things after there is a clear understanding of what the problem is and how it should be fixed. > Reverting and fixing it later seems like the safest option to me. Is there a > bigger problem that you tried to fix in that patch that wasn't as obvious? I do not see any problem with the code*.* I do not see any explanation of the root cause of the problem that Mike has. I do not see why anything has to be reverted. Especially because "since we're so close to 9.2-REL". Just in case, I'll remind that the commit in question is in stable/9 since Dec 23 2012. -- Andriy Gapon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5223B313.9060708>