![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
You forgot to leave the header ;) On Thu, 25 Mar 2004 23:13:48 +0100, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> wrote: > >> Suspend is a mechanism to suspend the system transparently and >> _NOT_EVER_ impairing the system. There can be NO_COMPROMISE and >> NO_EXCUSE. I walk out of my office suspending the machine and resuming it >> in front of my client it can't ever fail, or am I an idiot to advocate >> linux? >> >> If I would be willing to accept failure I would not spend my time here and >> utilize M$'s incarnation of an architectural idiocy. > > You are wrong. > > swsusp1 fails your test, swsusp2 fails your test, and pmdisk fails it, > too. If half of memory is used by kmalloc(), there's no sane way to > make suspend-to-disk working. And swsusp[12] does not. Granted, half > of memory kmalloc-ed is unusual situation, but it can theoreticaly > happen. Try mem=8M or something. No, I am not! mem=8M won't boot into a usable system. mem=~11M will not suspend and swsusp2 will exit gracefully and this is tested. So swsusp2 does _not_ fail. You still have a usable system instead of a paniced system you seem to like to accept. Regards Michael - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 13:01 [W:0.655 / U:0.040 seconds] ©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans | |||||||||||||