[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0707201608120.2546-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 16:12:31 -0400 (EDT)
From: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To: Oliver Neukum <oliver@...kum.org>
cc: Milton Miller <miltonm@....com>, Ying Huang <ying.huang@...el.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, David Lang <david@...g.hm>,
linux-pm <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Jeremy Maitin-Shepard <jbms@....edu>
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] Re: Hibernation considerations
On Fri, 20 Jul 2007, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> Am Freitag 20 Juli 2007 schrieb Alan Stern:
> > Some drivers need the ability to schedule. Some will need the ability
> > to allocate memory (although GFP_ATOMIC is probably sufficient). Some
> > will need timers to run.
>
> Some will have to request firmware. It can add up to some megabytes.
> In addition, if we don't freeze, some drivers, eg. video drivers, can
> do allocations in the megabyte range.
>
> It seems to me that without the freezer we will end up with many drivers
> needing a two step notification process. Furthermore there are requirements
> on the order of shutting down system facilities, eg. device addition must
> be stopped before drivers allocate firmware.
These are really separate issues, since they refer to things that have
to happen well before the memory snapshot is captured.
We already have a pre-suspend notification available for drivers that
need to allocate large amounts of memory.
You are correct about the need to delay/stop device addition. I don't
know how this can be done in general; each code path calling
device_add() may have to be treated individually.
Alan Stern
-
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