[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1183855362.3388.233.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 10:42:42 +1000
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc: Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@....com>,
Nigel Cunningham <nigel@...el.suspend2.net>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove process freezer from suspend to RAM pathway
On Sat, 2007-07-07 at 12:17 -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Sat, 7 Jul 2007, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>
> > > > And guess what ? It's what we do on powerbooks, and it works fine,
> > > > without a freezer :-)
>
> > If you remember, one of the things I've been advocating has always been
> > that we should put on hold all plug activity (unplug might be alright as
> > long as the user events are just delayed) when we start suspending. No
> > new devices, no new bindings. "hub" type devices are respondible for
> > bringing in the new stuff after resume.
>
> Which is exactly my point. It _doesn't_ work fine without a freezer,
> because the USB stack currently relies on the freezer to prevent plug
> activity.
Putting on hold plug activity has nothing, NOTHING, to do with the half
assed piece of deadlocking crap we have now we call a freezer.
As long as you guys keep mixing up all the issues and coming up with
totally bogus solutions that cannot work, we won't have a useful suspend
(either to RAM or to disk) in linux.
Ben.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists