From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 20 May 2001 00:31:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 20 May 2001 00:31:12 -0400 Received: from f00f.stub.clear.net.nz ([203.167.224.51]:58120 "HELO metastasis.f00f.org") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Sun, 20 May 2001 00:30:59 -0400 Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 16:30:41 +1200 From: Chris Wedgwood To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Pavel Machek , Richard Gooch , Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Getting FS access events Message-ID: <20010520163041.A6260@metastasis.f00f.org> In-Reply-To: <20010515161750.B38@toy.ucw.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from torvalds@transmeta.com on Sat, May 19, 2001 at 12:39:18PM -0700 X-No-Archive: Yes Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, May 19, 2001 at 12:39:18PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: Note that "resume from disk" does _not_ have to necessarily resume kernel data structures. It is enough if it just resumes the caches etc. For speeding up a boot process, sure... but for suspend/resume on a laptop --- why would you bother? Don't get _too_ hung up about the power-management kind of "invisible suspend/resume" sequence where you resume the whole kernel state. I'm confused. I've always wondered that before you suspend the state of a machine to disk, why we just don't throw away unnecessary data like anything not actively referenced. --cw