From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761579AbXGTVip (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Jul 2007 17:38:45 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755506AbXGTVid (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Jul 2007 17:38:33 -0400 Received: from ogre.sisk.pl ([217.79.144.158]:39988 "EHLO ogre.sisk.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752412AbXGTVib (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Jul 2007 17:38:31 -0400 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: Alan Stern Subject: Re: [linux-pm] Re: Hibernation considerations Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 23:46:34 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5 Cc: david@lang.hm, Milton Miller , linux-pm , LKML , "Huang, Ying" , Jeremy Maitin-Shepard References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200707202346.35901.rjw@sisk.pl> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Friday, 20 July 2007 18:15, Alan Stern wrote: > On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 david@lang.hm wrote: > > > or the userspace helper functions that setup the instructions for the > > hibernate warn you if you are telling it to mount a filesystem that it > > knows is ext3 and is in use by the system going to sleep. > > One can argue that the ext3 implementation is inadequate. We should be > able to give it a mount option requiring it to fail rather than play > back the journal and write to the disk. > > > > > What I've been trying to say from the very beginning is that the current > > > frameworks _support_ hibernation a la ACPI S4 (although that's not exactly > > > ACPI S4) and if we are going to introduce a new framework, then it should > > > be designed to _support_ ACPI S4 fully _from_ _the_ _start_. > > > > here is where there is some disagreement (although it may just be > > misunderstanding on the 'fully support' phrase) > > > > it sounds like you are saying that the ACPI support requires a lot of work > > (the phrase I've seen some people use is a requirement to 'fix all the > > drivers'). we aren't wanting to have this work prevent the non-ACPI > > hibernation from progressing. > > You have completely misunderstood. That phrase "fix all the drivers" > has nothing whatsoever to do with ACPI. It is a prerequisite for > removing the freezer. Yes. > And unless I'm mistaken, removing the freezer was the main reason for > doing all this kexec-style work in the first place. Yes, that also is my impression. Greetings, Rafael -- "Premature optimization is the root of all evil." - Donald Knuth