BFS 0472 Sync-up patch for 4.7 kernel is available after spending the last weekend to put all sync-up patches upon bfs 0472 and fixed the suspend/resume issue on one of my notebook.
Based on quick sanity tests, the cpufreq api deployment issue in 0470 has been fixed. And the performance for low workload is better than previous release.
Enjoy this and wait for the incoming vrq patch. :)
BR Alfred
I see your BFS version differs from Con's one much. But still those are "bare" versions. So what's the point?
ReplyDelete@post-factum:
DeleteThank you very much for your notification! Good to know, that someone with knowledge has time to follow the code changes! :-)
@Alfred:
You need to answer on this above.
Besides assuming that you work on the next VRQ, would you find time to backport the significant BFS 470 to 472 improvements for the 4.6 kernel VRQ?
Reason to ask for this is: I'm not sure how long forward porting of my old TuxOnIce working revision may take or if it may work at all. If in-kernel suspend-to-disk hasn't heavily improved in speed, I won't want to use it without TuxOnIce. Saying: I'd stay with 4.6 kernel until TOI works.
BR, Manuel Krause
Based on 0472, there are additional mainline sync-up patches from release to release that doesn't be pick-up by CK in my "bare" bfs patch. There are the commits in my git branch with "[Sync]" mark-up.
DeleteConsider the cpu hotplug changes and other api changes in 4.7, I don't think it's suitable to back-port to 4.6.
BR Alfred
@Alfred:
DeleteThank you for the information. Fortunately I was successful with my forward-porting, and as 4.7.0 doesn't make problems on my notebook, I'd stay with it and look forward to your new VRQ implementation. :-)
What still doesn't work on here is BFQ v8. Lockups after few minutes of uptime (with 4.6.x and 4.7.0 -- while the v7r11, with the omitted 4th patch, works fine). I follow their google group and see others having the problem, too. Let's give Paolo and his great team more time for the new code to mature.
BR Manuel Krause
@Alfred:
DeleteSorry for bothering -- this should be an encouragement for your continued VRQ work:
Interactivity with the plain BFS for 4.7.0 from yours is worse than every "bad" usage result with 4.6.x VRQ (+ testXYZ) on here. Just wanted to let you know.
Your next VRQ is highly appreciated!
BR Manuel Krause
Good news for the people trying to use BFQ v8 and being affected by panics/ lockups:
DeleteThe latest commit (on github) / patch (on the google-group) fixes the issue for me and at least one other person.
BR Manuel Krause
@Manuel
Deletevrq0 patch was out. And would you kindly point out the link for the patch/commit on github? Thought there is no panics/lockups issues here.
BR Alfred
With kernels without this recent BFQ commit my machine usually locked up within 2-7 minutes. It's not happening any more WITH the patch, having some hours of uptime and undergone some TOI hibernations with my experimental port, and so I'd consider it safe.
DeleteBR Manuel Krause
Alfred, with 4.5 I've got pretty much the same hang as usual and in pretty short period of time, but this time netconsole did not make any output for me.
ReplyDeleteWill wait for another hang. It definitely started since 4.5.
@pf
DeleteThanks for the info. Let's wait for another hang.