[lkml]   [2002]   [Nov]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: swsusp: don't eat ide disks

On Sun, 3 Nov 2002, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Is that really the right way to prepare disks for suspend?

It probably is, although I suspect it should just be a default action, and
drivers can choose to implement their own "suspend()" functionality if
they want to.

> I sleep all devices by telling driverfs to sleep them. Should I tell
> all block devices, then tell driverfs? Seems hacky to me. Or should
> idedisk_suspend generate request for itself, then pass it through
> queues?

I would strongly encourage letting the device hierarchy suspend() (now
called sysfs, not driverfs) call be the _only_ call the disk controller
ever gets. Having two different suspend mechanisms is just too confusing
for words, and there's no point.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:30    [W:0.086 / U:18.424 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site