[PATCH] PM: Make warning in suspend_test_finish() less likely to happen

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx>

Increase TEST_SUSPEND_SECONDS to 10 so the warning in
suspend_test_finish() doesn't annoy the users of slower systems so
much.

Also, make the warning print the suspend-resume cycle time, so
that we know why the warning actually triggered.

Patch prepared during the hacking session at the Kernel Summit in
Tokyo.

Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx>
---
 kernel/power/suspend_test.c |    5 +++--
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Index: linux-2.6/kernel/power/suspend_test.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/power/suspend_test.c
+++ linux-2.6/kernel/power/suspend_test.c
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@
  * The time it takes is system-specific though, so when we test this
  * during system bootup we allow a LOT of time.
  */
-#define TEST_SUSPEND_SECONDS	5
+#define TEST_SUSPEND_SECONDS	10
 
 static unsigned long suspend_test_start_time;
 
@@ -49,7 +49,8 @@ void suspend_test_finish(const char *lab
 	 * has some performance issues.  The stack dump of a WARN_ON
 	 * is more likely to get the right attention than a printk...
 	 */
-	WARN(msec > (TEST_SUSPEND_SECONDS * 1000), "Component: %s\n", label);
+	WARN(msec > (TEST_SUSPEND_SECONDS * 1000),
+	     "Component: %s, time: %u\n", label, msec);
 }
 
 /*
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/