From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Berg Subject: Re: [PATCH] PM: invoke suspend notifications after console switch Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 19:32:11 +0100 Message-ID: <1201199531.3454.141.camel@johannes.berg> References: <1197853799.4885.7.camel@johannes.berg> <1199970876.3861.66.camel@johannes.berg> <20080111182042.GC4016@ucw.cz> <1201135592.6815.14.camel@pasglop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1939398537922100142==" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1201135592.6815.14.camel@pasglop> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Mime-version: 1.0 Sender: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: benh@kernel.crashing.org Cc: Len Brown , linux-pm List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org --===============1939398537922100142== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-ELfdYUUiM902NlBMmf+b" --=-ELfdYUUiM902NlBMmf+b Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 11:46 +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > Its pretty intrusive I'd say. And it is wrong; we'd prefer userspace > > to know what we are doing; if they are told we are suspending, > > userspace may be able to do something more clever than long console > > switch. > >=20 > > I'd prefer this not to go into mainline. >=20 > So you'd prefer mainline to be broken and X to lock up ? nice ! >=20 > The console switch happens -anyway- with the current code right ? So we > aren't changing that. Mind you, that's the (only!) other alternative: removing the in-kernel console switch completely which is the only way to allow userspace to do something "more clever than long console switch". > However, (even today I believe), users of /dev/apm_bios, such as X, will > deadlock the VT subsystem if they get notified of the suspend before the > kernel initiated console switch happen (which can happen today if the > suspend is triggered by an APM application I -think- (to be verified) Yeah I'm pretty sure that can happen, but in fact, that will happen regardless of this patch until my other patch is applied. johannes --=-ELfdYUUiM902NlBMmf+b Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: Johannes Berg (powerbook) iQIVAwUAR5jZqqVg1VMiehFYAQLcRBAArFTRdsLWZTCFAI7c5CO0ZddB/y5cil8m 8h2lKRL7QfF20xcDMC/JCZcCZXsfMiQKrA1zUy+UXlGvDl9yH+fK+RWYSsC172k2 5BIipVyfD6xsTpLgk8KeqHBYaPrkXbDO2gD/v17WbAtG/b7Cs6Fj5AKSmeY6/WjH POAJLPghyOVmzUlkNUhVIZRCXCaMn+ZYwNY1w27Zuhhn1Q0pWZ89FS16fEjhlRcR VoKFycFmFKriCAAsZ2MShxtb7nZ4DCUoXPiwL/XpMzmbpaDmlQ+822QBUsPEcXzd bu1wKn0eAXblWAg4mIrrqNFIvwAhJdWg0+V556UsDADXEJXm8Oaq9RI1+QRpe6XI E5o9ui9TJj2F0t+OlWzwLiokHX6/KT1P2N8n0cLLJHP/A2+HRZo1XUQiemgONf1l LLnwn2bXefxUzAxo6bhP3KfpEzRlPS898EqTdy0Qa19IT7Df125TZ+yFhN56TPwj AC8DOumjs2dDQ7ESGpBGwgJejpCkh3LN1xmJNN4H8Pt0H+xfSIN5M7j+puP66Wsb 70t2WFSc/qwhaBjsQbY3PvCKJEUsOnJoQ9RSVGKKec3tDD1BuR9PvH9kQBxLJBa2 Jx8CtZ8QCFinq8i2f+qgG/u0ZVL01g5YLTshS8+jQlXkCDkiOpUj+KmzdS7tt6BP EbS/sIaRj0o= =4Mek -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-ELfdYUUiM902NlBMmf+b-- --===============1939398537922100142== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline --===============1939398537922100142==--