Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 2 Jun 2005 09:14:31 +0200 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: Freezer Patches. |
| |
Hi!
> > > > swsusp1 should not need any special casing of sync, right? We can > > > > simply do sys_sync(), then freeze, or something like that. We could > > > > even remove sys_sync() completely; it is not needed for correctness. > > Wrong. I guess you're only trying it on a machine that isn't actually > doing anything :). I've forgotten whether it was this freezer > implementation or the last, but we've been testing freezing processes > when the load average exceeds 100. If you have a thread that is syncing > and another that's submitting I/O continually (think dd, for example), > you want this.
If sys_sync() is not working, *fix sys_sync()*. [BTW I see that problem before and I think it is being worked on.] I'm *not* going to work around it in refrigerator.
Pavel
- 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/
| |