[PATCH 0/2] acpi: increase delays for s3 and s4 to make tests less aggressive

[Alex Hung]

On 04/29/2013 11:59 PM, Colin Ian King wrote:
> On 29/04/13 00:31, Alex Hung wrote:
>> The default delays for s3 and s4 are too short and too aggressive, and
>> many
>> reported failures are fixed by simply increases the delays. If the delays
>> are too short, the bottlenecks of the tests depend on hardware
>> designs, ex.
>> whether mainboards stablize fast enough when powers are removed, and OS
>> behaviours, ex. whether drivers and services are loaded. Increasing
>> the delays
>> can reduce the dependency.
>
> The original idea was to make S3 + S4 tests aggressive to catch out
> failures, so I think the defaults are sane because that the original
> intention.

Hi Colin,

We received some feedbacks from IHV and OEM/ODM that increasing the 
delays resolve their problems of running fwts s3/s4 tests, and that's 
also exactly what they do to close the bugs. The idea "if nobody uses 
the defaults, it probably means it shouldn't be the defaults" pops up in 
my mind.

I also think the defaults are too aggressive. For instance, HP's test 
suite sets the delay as 120 seconds between between wake-up and suspend, 
and currently it is 0 second in fwts. Dell/Toshiba/ASUS also does not 
set the delay to 0. If my memory does not betray me, the delay is not 
smaller than 120 seconds.

I do agree that fwts should be aggressive, and that's the reason I chose 
the number to be smaller than OEM's tests.

Cheers,
Alex Hung

>
>>
>> Alex Hung (2):
>>    acpi: s3: increase delays to match user scanerio and to reduce false
>>         non-firmware-related failures.
>>    acpi: s4: increase delays to match user scanerio and to reduce false
>>         non-firmware-related failures.
>>
>>   src/acpi/s3/s3.c |    6 +++---
>>   src/acpi/s4/s4.c |    4 ++--
>>   2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>
>