[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4CE9D5E2.9090706@zytor.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2010 18:30:58 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Nigel Cunningham <lkml@...elcunningham.com.au>
CC: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [patch] x86: avoid unnecessary smp alternatives switch during
suspend/resume
On 11/21/2010 01:27 AM, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> We have a few others things that want to modify their behaviour
> according to whether we're doing the atomic copy/restore. Perhaps it
> would be an idea to just use a single flag, perhaps a value for
> system_state?
system_state is pretty much considered harmful...
-hpa
--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
--
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