[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1766178.k5mi2k4gBr@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date: Fri, 08 May 2015 22:39:21 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To: One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] suspend: delete sys_sync()
On Friday, May 08, 2015 08:52:33 PM One Thousand Gnomes wrote:
> > > Some of this however is crappy suspend/resume handling. If the suspend
> > > subsystem was doing its job then for the cases of timeout triggered
> > > suspend it would have triggered most of the disk writes ten seconds
> > > before it tried to suspend properly ;-)
> >
> > No problem, continue to use s2ram on your system -- and to the extent
> > that sync works, your data will be on disk. (sync reliability is a
> > different topic...)
>
> Ok let me ask the other obvious question. For all the mainstream
> distributions do their default tools and setup sync such that removing it
> from the kernel won't actually be noticable by users ?
>
> If the answer is yes, then I shall shut up and stop worrying 8)
The distros I'm familiar with do that. It has always been done traditionally
and I don't think anyone had enough guts to remove it from the scripts. :-)
We need to be more careful about Android as I said, but that can be addressed
by adding sync() to the autosleep thread.
Rafael
--
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