[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200707231431.30372.oliver@neukum.org>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 14:31:29 +0200
From: Oliver Neukum <oliver@...kum.org>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc: rjw@...k.pl, nigel@...el.suspend2.net, stern@...land.harvard.edu,
nigel@...pend2.net, jbms@....edu, miltonm@....com,
ying.huang@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, david@...g.hm,
linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] Re: Hibernation considerations
Am Montag 23 Juli 2007 schrieb Miklos Szeredi:
> > The reason is that we want them to "park" in safe places, ie. where there
> > are no locks held etc. Thus, these safe places need to be chosen somehow
> > and since they are not marked throughout the code, we choose the obvious
> > one. :-)
>
> Why shouldn't locks be held?
>
> No locks which are required for suspend must be held, sure. But
> otherwise holding locks doesn't matter at all.
If you can provide a way to tell them apart, this would work.
Regards
Oliver
-
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