[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:0.037 / U:1.768 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site