Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fix console handling during suspend/resume

Pavel Machek
2006-06-15T16:52:19Z

On Čt 15-06-06 09:43:04, David Brownell wrote:
> On Thursday 15 June 2006 1:39 am, Pavel Machek wrote:
> >
> > > Actually it would be interesting to hear counter-arguments to this
> > > position:
> > >
> > > We already HAVE that two-phase thing going on, at
> > > least for swsusp. In phase I a PM_EVENT_FREEZE
> > > gets sent. Then in phase II a PM_EVENT_SUSPEND gets
> > > tries to really suspend things.
> > >
> > > One counter-argument might be that "phase I.5 resumes those devices"
> > > is a problem. Another might be that "FREEZE should not be sent to
> > > the console(s), the swap device, or their parents". I suspect there
> > > are a few more issues mixed up in there too.
> >
> > This is FAQ:
>
> Which seems to suggest that you are Frequently giving a useless
> Answer to the Question ... and in this case, not the question
> which was asked.

Okay, so what is the question you are asking?

> > Q: I do not understand why you have such strong objections to idea of
> > selective suspend.
>
> Not a question, and it's not clear who "you" is. Presumably, "Pavel"?
> Plus it doesn't relate to the position sketched above.

Feel free to submit documentation patch.
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
_______________________________________________
linux-pm mailing list
linux-pm@lists.osdl.org