From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: syncing the disks when entering sleep Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 01:51:03 +0100 Message-ID: <201001270151.03241.rjw@sisk.pl> References: <76FA3B279DD9DA48896E2B404944957204E0B241@USA7061MS02.na.xerox.net> <201001261917.37194.rjw@sisk.pl> <20100126145113.GA11130@ucw.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20100126145113.GA11130@ucw.cz> 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: Pavel Machek Cc: linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, "Leisner, Martin" List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday 26 January 2010, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > > > > The ideal behavior would be: > > > > > > > > > > if(disk is spun up) > > > > > then let the sync happen > > > > > > > > I'm not against that. Patch welcome. :-) > > > > > > I'd say such knob would be ugly. > > > > Define "ugly", please. > > Per-system property, which should better be > per-program-that-requires-suspend. You request suspend without syncing > (you want it quick, battery is 90%), then the battery runs low, and > system daeomn requests s2ram, not realizing that someone disabled sync > from under him. I really prefer a per-system setting. The program that wants to sync anyway can easily do that by itself. > > > But maybe acceptable way would be echo mem-nosync > power, or maybe it can > > > already be done using s2disk ioctl interface...? > > > > Nope. > > Nope what? > > AFAICT no new interface is needed. Just do SNAPSHOT_FREEZE, then > _S2RAM then _UNFREEZE. That's not quite straightforward and I wouldn't seriously suggest that to anyone. Rafael