Re: suspend2 merge (was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: CFS and suspend2: hang in atomic copy)

Linus Torvalds
2007-04-25T22:19:13Z

On Wed, 25 Apr 2007, Pavel Machek wrote:
>
> Not the same... but they are still related. "freeze" (for atomic
> snapshot) is actually subset of "suspend"... freeze needs DMAs off and
> saved state, and you need DMAs off and saved state for "suspend".

THEY HAVE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING IN COMMON!

Nobody in their right mind thinks that "disable DMA" and "suspend" are
similar operations.

> So it is actually correct to do "suspend" when you want "freeze"; it
> is just slow. That's why they only differ in parameter these days.

It is *not* correct to "suspend" when you want "freeze".

I don't understand how you can even *claim* something like that.

Here's a trivial example:
- SCSI disk

Tell me, what does "suspend" do, and what does "freeze" (snapshot) do?

And name *one* thing that have in common.

I'll tell you: Nada. Zero. Zilch. Nothing.

"Freeze" for a disk is a total no-op. There is no DMA, there is no
nothing. In contrast, "suspend" for a disk is a totally valid operation.

Anybody who claims that these two operations are "related" is a moron.

I'm sorry Pavel, but that's exactly how it is.

Linus