Moving from https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=76211 reported by Len Brown. The last observation there was: This problem still exists in Linux-4.8.0, though the delay on this machine is now 909 ms, rather than 1,200 ms. Attached, please find the analzye_suspend.py output as run on the same laptop as above, installed with Ubuntu 16.10 and its 4.8.0-22-generic kernel. Curiously, i915 resume invokes intel_hdmi_detect FOUR TIMES -- twice in a kthread, and again twice in-line. This costs 160ms each time it is invoked.
Created attachment 130655 [details] analyze suspend output from bugzilla.kernel.org https://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=241901
@Len Brown: Could you provide the output of: cat /sys/kernel/debug/dri/0/eDP-1/i915_panel_timings and analyze_suspend.py -config config/suspend-callgraph.cfg -maxdepth 0 -filter i915 on a recent kernel (preferably drm-tip)? The callgraph is needed to be able to pinpoint the functions that slow us down, and running on a recent kernel will ensure that the issue hasn't already been fixed. The multiple invocations of intel_hdmi is most likely triggered by hotplug detection of external displays. That logic is, to say the least, fairly hairy. There have been some fixes to that area since 4.8 though, as well as various other fixes to lower suspend/resume times.
Hello, Is there any advance in this case? If there is any new information please share. Thank you.
can you respond to David's request
(In reply to David Weinehall from comment #2) > @Len Brown: Could you provide the output of: > cat /sys/kernel/debug/dri/0/eDP-1/i915_panel_timings... > analyze_suspend.py -config config/suspend-callgraph.cfg -maxdepth 0 -filter > i915... There haven't been update on this case from the reporter since 2016-10-18 (https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=76211#c27), is this case going to be keep open or should be closed as invalid?? Thank you.
I think a year should've been quite enough for the bug reporter to provide more information, especially since the bug report concerned 4.8, while we're currently working on 4.14. I don't know whether INVALID or WORKSFORME is the relevant status here, but I'm picking INVALID.
(In reply to David Weinehall from comment #6) > I think a year should've been quite enough for the bug reporter to provide > more information, especially since the bug report concerned 4.8, while we're > currently working on 4.14. > > I don't know whether INVALID or WORKSFORME is the relevant status here, but > I'm picking INVALID. Thanks David. Then closing. @Len: If issue exist with latest kernels, please file a new bug.
Use of freedesktop.org services, including Bugzilla, is subject to our Code of Conduct. How we collect and use information is described in our Privacy Policy.