From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pavel Machek Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove process freezer from suspend to RAM pathway Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2007 12:02:04 +0200 Message-ID: <20070709100204.GN5401@elf.ucw.cz> References: <1183929611.3388.303.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200707090847.43378.oliver@neukum.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200707090847.43378.oliver@neukum.org> 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: Oliver Neukum Cc: Matthew Garrett , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Kyle Moffett , linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org Hi! > > > But I'm not sure it's a good idea in the long run. =A0Think of a pr= inter=20 > > > daemon, for example. =A0It shouldn't have to experience unexpected = I/O=20 > > > problems merely because someone has decided to put the system to sl= eep. > >=20 > > Why not ? Printer is offline when machine is asleep... trying to prin= t ...filesystems are offline, too, when the machine is asleep. Yet, unmounting everything on suspend would not result in useful suspend support. Yes, I believe we should be transparent. Pavel --=20 (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/b= log.html