From: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
To: lm-sensors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [lm-sensors] resume lm_sensor from hibernate or suspend
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 13:21:57 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090714152157.408d601c@hyperion.delvare> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4A5C7322.6090409@redhat.com>
Hi Nikola,
On Tue, 14 Jul 2009 13:59:30 +0200, Nikola Pajkovsky wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> I'd like to talk about bug
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?idH6874. Hans says that's not
> good idea resume automatically with sensors -s in
> /usr/lib/pm-utils/sleep.d.
> Do you have any other idea?
This has the merit of being very simple and to solve the problem
immediately at hand. However there are a few things to keep in mind:
* Whether limits need to be rewritten may depend on several things,
including but not limited to:
- resume from RAM vs. resume from disk
- hardware monitoring chip model
- BIOS implementation details
* You should only call "sensors -s" if you also do it on system boot.
If the user/admin is somehow given an option to run it or not at
system boot then his/her choice should also be honored at resume time.
That being said, the default libsensors configuration file these days
no longer contains any possibly wrong "set" statement, so we should
be on the safe side either way.
* I thought that restoring devices to their pre-suspend state was the
kernel's job? With the proposed user-space solution, I can imagine a
scenario where the system is resumed with random sensor limits, an
alarm triggers because of this, and only then "sensors -s" is run.
This could cause spurious beeping or system halt for example,
depending on how the monitoring device in question is wired.
That being said, these are issues we would already hit now without
your proposed implementation, so it can't make it worse.
All in all I see no problem implementing you idea on a per-distribution
basis as long as my second point above is taken into consideration.
Hans, did you have any specific issue in mind, which I overlooked?
--
Jean Delvare
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-07-14 13:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-07-14 11:59 [lm-sensors] resume lm_sensor from hibernate or suspend Nikola Pajkovsky
2009-07-14 13:21 ` Jean Delvare [this message]
2009-07-14 13:23 ` Hans de Goede
2009-07-14 15:04 ` Hans de Goede
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090714152157.408d601c@hyperion.delvare \
--to=khali@linux-fr.org \
--cc=lm-sensors@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.