Sorry to reply to myself.

I don't think I worded that last message right... I didn't mean that
locking isn't an issue at all, just that we don't have to worry about
another process writing to the console while we are.

Nigel

On Sat, 2004-01-24 at 05:07, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> Hi.
> 
> On Fri, 2004-01-23 at 15:49, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > Also, by using write instead of blasting the low level code,
> > you will not have to worry about locking issues. (The way
> > you tap the low level stuff should require at least the console
> > semaphore held, write to /dev/console don't)
> > 
> > Ben
> 
> Locking is not an issue. This is suspend-to-disk. Everything else is
> stopped while we're working.
> 
> By the way, am I understanding the suggestion correctly? Do you
> (collective) mean getting a fd for /dev/console from within kernel code
> and using that? I've been looking at the way printk works and wondering
> if con->write is equivalent (once I find the right console to write to)?
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Nigel
-- 
My work on Software Suspend is graciously brought to you by
LinuxFund.org.