From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Brownell Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH -mm 2/2]: PM: SMP-safe freezer Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2006 21:43:18 -0800 Message-ID: <200612042143.19264.david-b@pacbell.net> References: <200612032318.29030.rjw@sisk.pl> <200612041503.04439.rjw@sisk.pl> <20061204194401.GA4199@ucw.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20061204194401.GA4199@ucw.cz> Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: suspend-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: suspend-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net To: linux-pm@lists.osdl.org Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , suspend-devel List , Stephen Hemminger , Pavel Machek List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org [ off $SUBJECT ] On Monday 04 December 2006 11:44 am, Pavel Machek wrote: > > But I think I'll need to add TIF_FROZEN for all architectures, because suspend > > to RAM is supposed to work on all of them, isn't it? > > Well, yes, it should be added, but no, I do not think s2ram works on > that many machines. Userspace "s2ram" != PM_SUSPEND_MEM ("suspend-to-RAM") though. I'm not even sure there's a globally acceptable definition of what PM_SUSPEND_MEM indicates, beyond the fact that one expects it saves more power than PM_SUSPEND_STANDBY. Yes, the Documentation/power/states.txt regurgitates ACPI spec text. But lots of non-ACPI systems don't have any reason to do things like ACPI says. And in terms of latency, I've seen a lot of that be due to the PM framework taking so long to walk the device tree, with no substantial difference between "standby" and "str" costs. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV