Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
Linux 3.15 Can Resume From Suspend Faster (01.org)
162 points by arunc on Apr 13, 2014 | hide | past | web | favorite | 65 comments



This seems to be a similar approach to the one taken by Windows[0]

There were a causes for the poor resume time, but a large contributor was device resume time. Since the OS serialized S0 IRPs to all devices in the PnP tree, the time for each device to resume added sequentially to the system's resume time.

The OS serialization of the S0 IRPs could not change for Windows XP, so the problem was attacked at the other end...each driver would complete the S0 IRP as fast as it could so the OS could resume quickly and then asynchronously power up the device.

This way each device could power up in parallel and the total time to power up was not sequential (nor was it only the longest of any device to power up since there is still ordering between parent and child devices) and resume time could be dramatically slower.

[0]http://blogs.msdn.com/b/doronh/archive/2007/10/15/fast-resum...


And that was for Windows XP, 13 years ago...


I switched from XP to Ubuntu about 6 years ago. At the time I was running an old dell laptop that had been shipped with XP. Perhaps their concept is similar, but my resume time in Ubuntu was a lot faster than that of XP.

Perhaps they had the right idea but didn't execute it perfectly, hopefully the Linux devs will get it right. I'm impressed by the resume times in windows 7 on faster computers but on more budget systems Linux still seems to be the king of resume times and performance (at least in my experience). I've only used windows 8 on an employees laptop and from what I can tell, it wasn't made to perform well on his Toshiba to say the least. I've seen both windows 7 and windows 8 running very well, much better than linux, on the right hardware though. The performance of windows on budget hardware (75% of consumer) is mediocre at best, which is unfortunate, but what's even more unfortunate is that because a select few can get Windows performing amazingly on great hardware, the consumer market seems to think it runs amazingly everywhere. Hopefully soon it will, or people will come to their senses and realize installing windows on a low budget (average consumer grade) system is more trouble than it's worth.


Interestingly, OS X has the fastest resume from suspend I've ever seen. I'll see if this beats it.


One thing I hate with my Mac is the window dressing they do, they show the screen as it was before it's actually usable to give an impression of faster resume than it really has.


It's good as an interface, I think, because the human also requires some startup time -- if you can see what the screen looks like before it is interactive, you can orient yourself while the machine finishes reactivating.


Indeed it's a very good thing, especially if the actual resume can happen in that time span.

Sometimes it's frustrating since it looks like frozen.

Sometimes it's misleading, e.g. when you see that you didn't get an email or a IM notification, and then you realize it's because your e-mail/IM app is not really running yet.

Or when you take a quick glance to the wifi indicator and see that there are many bars and then you go away assuming there is connectivity but when it actually awakes you are not really online.


Apple does this with iPad as well, showing a screenshot of a previously used app before the app is re-loaded into memory.


Microsoft faked the startup speed beginning with WinXP too. In Windows 2000 it took a long time to see the desktop. To speed it up in WinXP they show the desktop quit early but several startup-processes are still running with higher priority. So you had to wait til the hour-class was gone and the UI reacted to mouse clicks. Well the same was true for earlier MacOS X like 10.4 Tiger were you could watch and wait the spinning ball.

Nowadays with multi-core CPUs and SSD you won't notice such effects.

Windows 2000 boot to desktop: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBdy9zxNVEw

Windows XP boot to desktop: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHgCrbcu0Ow


Systemd on Linux now does the same thing. On an SSD, it is really fast. On an older hard drive with slow seek times, you get a bit of thrashing which causes the overall boot time to be a tad bit slower in some cases.


Hate? I like this feature for 2 reasons: the clock shows the time at which the computer suspended (gives me an indication of how many hours I've been asleep on the keyboard :)) and if I was reading something, I can keep reading it while the OS loads.


Just like they fake the perceived slimness of their machines. Thin border, deeper bottom.

Looks better than it is, works very well.


Helps to slide it into a narrow opening.


I've notice this too. The lock screen shows before it can accept key presses so I've had to wait else having it miss the beginning of my passphrase.


It does this when resuming from disk, not from RAM.


I use both OS X and Linux daily, each on laptops and I would have agreed with you until recently. On 3.12-3.14 my resume times on have gone from slower than OS X to at least as fast, sometimes apparently faster, than the same OS X laptop.

This is a pure btrfs, gnome, arch linux install. Old hardware (Thinkpad x220).

Notably OS X still brings networking back up faster, but that is in the pipeline already for Linux.


> Notable OS X still brings networking back up faster

With the notable point that it doesn't work properly on a lot of hardware, in my experience (and in the experience of others I know). The major ISP in ireland provides the same box for most connections, and my mac just will not hold a connection to them when resuming from sleep. It appears to be an issue revolving around assignment of IP addresses, but I can't reproduce it, and it doesn't happen on my work network or uni network, but every UPC network I use with the same equipment (Technicolor TC7200U) has the issue.


Gosh, TC7200 units just suck. I replaced mine with a Fritzbox and poof, no more random network stalls, suspend issues etc.


Offtopic: My cat opened the TC7200 accidentaly. There are two serial ports. One is easily reachable and gives access to the bootloader which lets you r/w memory (and jump to anything in memory). The second one is under the cooler. <s>You</s> Your cat can easily solder <s>yourself</s> itself on it from the back of the pcb, if <s>you</s> your cat doesn't want to remove it. You'll see linux booting, you can login with your webinterface credentials, but it kicks you out immediately because you don't have a shell.

Just in case anyone want's to work on what my cat has discovered. It is leased with my ISP contract, so I would never open it myself.


Linux based? Well fuck Technicolor then, there's no mention of GPL source code... and I would not be surprised if it's U-boot based.

As for the "fuck" part, AVM with the Fritzbox ain't a bit better, though. Looks like all cable routers are locked down and no sources available - probably to prevent people from building DOCSIS sniffers or network disrupters (30-apartment house, all connected via DOCSIS on one link, now good luck finding the asshole).


Please share your intel, only thing I've seen so far was on here, no notion of a second serial port: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057147563

I'd love to see some progress on this, I also have a USB-TTL ready, but no real reverse engineering skills.

Did you see the telnet running on 192.168.100.1?


A dead HN thread isn't the right place to do this. Contact me at hnlawl.tc7200 ãt dumbinter pẽriod net.

I've quickly googled a picture of the PCB for you and annotated it. From you thread you linked that's the bootloader serial port. if you look beneath the cooler (without removing it) you'll see "console" written there. That's the Linux serial console. I didn't want to remove the cooler. So my cat just soldered itself onto it from the back of the PCB. I'm not sure what the pinout was anymore. But it's easy enough to figure out with a multimeter.

Image: http://abload.de/img/tc7200hxati.jpg

Edit: I've made a picture, My cellphone cam sucks, but you can see the "CONSOLE" written on it. Just use a multimeter on the back of your PCB to figure out the pinout.

http://abload.de/img/consolezmy3k.jpg

Also I did see the telnet port in the management net, but could figure out the login. The regular HTTP webinterface loads too on this ip, but you can't login with your credentials. If my create a backup from your config on the webinterface, there seems to be a user for ISP support at the end of the file. But I couldn't login with that either.


I have experienced the opposite with my MacBook Air. I have a Asus RT ac 66u router and use 5ghz on both the air and my Acer Chromebook c720 with archlinux installed on it using NetworkManager.

The the MacBook Air takes about 6sec to connect to the wifi while my Chromebook takes less than 2 seconds. Both can load Internet pages instantly after the OS reports that it's connected.

I have no idea why the MacBook takes so long, but I recently did a fresh install on it and got the same results


How did you get suspend and resume running on the C720? I have a C720P and I've been trying to get it to resume at all(it freezes when I reopen the lid)


I see the same issues on my MBA


Slightly tangential, but I have almost the same setup (Arch + Thinkpad) and I've noticed slower shutdown times since ~3.12 due to systemd taking down oldroot. Are you experiencing the same thing?


"...that is in the pipeline already for Linux."

Would you have a link to this?



I recommend moving past this blog-fluff and going directly to the Google+ announcement[1].

Quite impressive improvements. Can't wait until this goes live on normal distros.

[1] https://plus.google.com/+TomGundersen/posts/eztZWbwmxM8


Is btrfs stable with hibernate now? The last couple of times I used it, it crashed on me.


I had a couple problems requiring a btrfsck, specifically related to google-chrome cache directories. Never had it since. I use btrfs snapshotting a lot (for convenient system rollback).

I definitely am not running btrfs on a production machine, but I love it on this laptop. Wouldn't call it stable yet.

edit to note that I don't hibernate, just sleep.


I don't know you'd ever use hibernate anymore. I can cold boot to desktop faster than it takes to read 16GB of ram contents off a mechanical drive.


Speed isn't the only consideration. If you're using disk encryption, the only way to remove keys from RAM is to power off or hibernate. Preserving state between sessions with hibernation is much more convenient. Also, Linux only uses RAM * 2/5 as the size of the hibernation image [1]. You can make this even smaller by changing /sys/power/image_size. So with 16GB of RAM, it only has to write/read about 6.4GB.

[1] https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/power/interface.txt


If you use hibernate won't the keys be stored on the swap partition?


You can use LVM to make the swap partition inside the encrypted container. If you don't want to use LVM, you can just use a swap file on an encrypted partition (but this isn't supported with btrfs).


Must be pretty quick because Ubuntu resumes before I can fully open my laptop lid...


I was going to post the same.

Gentoo + Linux 3.14 + ZFS + dual SSDs + Macbook Pro 17" hardware (~2010).

Theory: Hardware subsystems on MBPs may have relatively strong power up speeds versus some other laptops.


As the slowdown is waiting for the disk to spin up, anything with an SSD will restart faster than something without...


Do you have hibernate working on that setup or just resume? ZoL is great, but not having hibernate is a killer.


Whatever pm-suspend is. Works great for me.


Debian SID: not quite so fast but certainly close. Thinkpad X00s.

    keith@mocha:~$ uname -a
    Linux mocha 3.13-1-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 3.13.7-1 (2014-03-25) x86_64 GNU/Linux


Lucky you. Mine manages to hang before I can fully open my laptop lid! (12.04 LTS). Reverted to windows and using Linux in a VM.


Lenovo T400 here with 12.04 LTS, have a similar problem. Using the instructions from https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Lenovo_ThinkPad_T400#SU... I managed to reduce it from about 1-in-3 to 1-in-10, but it's still not ideal.


In my experience it is the other way round. I run Linux 3.13 on Macbook pro (Early 2011). OSX takes 2~4 seconds, linux takes ~1 second.


My MBP (Late 2009) takes less than a second both on Ubuntu and OS X (Mavericks) to password prompt.


On SSD?


Was it because your macbook pro has an SSD?


I got curious about this as well.

The data presented shows resume times like nothing I have experienced in years. I'm guessing that if you already have a SSD-enabled laptop, the improvements wont be that noticable.

Still: Good to see more and more subsystems moving to parallel/async initialization. Every measure counts, and together I'm certain they do add up.


OSX > Linux. Love it


Here's an archived version, while the site is down: http://web.archive.org/web/20140331181833/https://01.org/sus... I don't see any mention of version 3.15, just a patch and some tests with 3.11?

SEJeff: don't use link shorteners.


It got merge in 3.15 you can see it in linus tree at http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.g...


Offtopic, but they've got real cool domain (01.org), and I don't see no sites at 02.org etc; even for 01.org the InterNIC tells nothing! (whois limit exceeded) http://reports.internic.net/cgi/whois?whois_nic=01.org&type=...

Could somebody please comment on this?


I'm sorry, for some weird reason my browser didn't load from the first try all those 0\d.org sites that apparently do exist.


This looks like it is from back in January 24, 2014. Has it now been accepted into 3.15?

Regardless, is this what OSX does? From my experience, it is drastically faster at resuming.


Yes it has been merged, however given that the merge window only opened recently the 3.15 release will be 3-4 months away. Given that time frame its not likely that 3.15 will make it into the autumns Linux distribution releases. Probably be a year before this gets into the hands of users.

(unless someone backports it or you build your own kernel)


Or if one is using a distribution with rolling-releases, or just one that puts kernel updates into its repositories.


It sounds like you're using a distro that does just this, but is too modest to go name-dropping.

May I ask what distro(s) you had in mind?


Suse tumbleweed, the Kernel Developers PPA, Debian Experimental / Unstable, Arch, Fedora Rawhide, and Gentoo all deliver new kernels usually within a month of release, most within days (albeit more buggy).


I seem to get kernel updates using Debian Unstable (I don't pay much attention; but my current kernel is 3.13 and I installed my current OS years ago) and I think Arch does too. I'm sure there's others.


Gentoo, Arch at least (and related distros). I also believe Fedora does that.


That blog post mentions ATA and SCSI patches, but only a SCSI patch was merged, any idea why?


Might be interesting, but the site is down already


it's resuming from suspend


Oddly the Google Cache link also doesn't load.


I did for me once I switched to the text-only version: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https:/...




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: