From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030448AbWEYVoo (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 May 2006 17:44:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030450AbWEYVoo (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 May 2006 17:44:44 -0400 Received: from gprs189-60.eurotel.cz ([160.218.189.60]:28383 "EHLO amd.ucw.cz") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030447AbWEYVom (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 May 2006 17:44:42 -0400 Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 23:43:54 +0200 From: Pavel Machek To: kronos@kronoz.cjb.net Cc: Michael Tokarev , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: swsusp in 2.6.16: works fine w/o PSE... Message-ID: <20060525214350.GC6347@elf.ucw.cz> References: <20060524230538.GA616@dreamland.darkstar.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060524230538.GA616@dreamland.darkstar.lan> X-Warning: Reading this can be dangerous to your mental health. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060126 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi! > I'm CC-ing the two swsusp gurus ;) > > > I was just feeling lucky and tried suspend-to-disk cycle > > on my VIA C3 machine, which lacks PSE which is marked as > > being required for swsusp to work. After commenting out > > the PSE check in include/asm-i386/suspend.h and rebooting, > > I tried the whole cycle, several times, with real load > > (while running 3 kernel compile in parallel) and while > > IDLE... And surprizingly, it all worked flawlessly for > > me, without a single glitch... > > > > So the question is: is PSE really needed nowadays? I think so. Or can you prove that pagetables are not going to be overwritten in wrong order in !PSE case? Look at x86-64 how !PSE case can be solved, but it is a bit of code. Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html