From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Garrett Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove process freezer from suspend to RAM pathway Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 22:20:02 +0100 Message-ID: <20070703212002.GA28895@srcf.ucam.org> References: <20070703211227.GA28758@srcf.ucam.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Alan Stern Cc: linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 05:16:37PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > On Tue, 3 Jul 2007, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > But that's fine - "Are we undergoing a systemwide suspend" is an easy > > question to ask. Freezing processes instead means that most of those > > paths will never be tested. > > The question is easy to ask, but it's not so easy to figure out what > you should do if the answer is Yes. Freezing processes instead means > that those "untested" paths -- in many, many drivers -- won't have to > exist at all. We're used to the idea of applications blocking when a resource they're using goes away - NFS has done it forever. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org