Hi.

On Wednesday 26 July 2006 05:17, David Brownell wrote:
> On Tuesday 25 July 2006 11:29 am, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Tue, 25 Jul 2006, David Brownell wrote:
> > > Hmm ... I just noticed that the swsusp code path (PM_SUSPEND_DISK)
> > > is ignoring the new suspend_prepare() mechanism.
> > >
> > > That doesn't seem like a good thing ... Linus, is there a reason you
> > > did it that way?
> >
> > Just because I found that neither interesting nor testable in my
> > environment.
>
> Yeah, testable is an issue.  Maybe a better fix would be to remove
> the bus.suspend_prepare() operation for now.  Someone with real use
> cases could easily add a complete working package that includes that
> mechanism plus some testable code that needs it.

Not knowing anything about the actual details of the problem, I wonder if 
these new calls would help with that acpi issue where it tries to allocate 
memory with GFP_KERNEL during drivers suspend. Would it be helpful to 
allocate it at this point instead, and free it in a matching call at resume 
time? Perhaps a similar scheme could be useful for video drivers (cough fglrx 
cough) that might want to allocate large amounts of memory when dri is 
enabled?

Regards,

Nigel
-- 
Nigel, Michelle and Alisdair Cunningham
5 Mitchell Street
Cobden 3266
Victoria, Australia