[lkml]   [2007]   [Apr]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: suspend2 merge (was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: CFS and suspend2: hang in atomic copy)

On Wed, 2007-04-25 at 10:48 +0200, Xavier Bestel wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-04-25 at 07:23 +0000, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > I absolutely detest all suspend-to-disk crap. Quite frankly, I hate the
> > > whole thing. I think they've _all_ caused problems for the "true" suspend
> > > (suspend-to-ram), and the last thing I want to see is three or four
> >
> > Well, it is a bit more complex than that.
> >
> > suspend-to-disk is a workaround for
> >
> > 'suspend-to-ram eats too much power' (plus some details like
> > being able to replace battery).
> >
> > suspend-to-ram is a workaround for
> >
> > 'idle machine takes way too much power' (plus some details
> > like don't spin the disk so that machine is safe to carry).
> I think it depends on who you ask. I personally think that suspend-to-
> $youchoose is a workaround for the slowness of system startup. I never
> turn off my laptop, I just suspend it.
> (And guess what, it uses APM and suspend is really faster and way more
> reliable than each kernel implementation I could try).

If you tried Suspend2 and had problems with reliability, please send me
logs. I'll do all I can to help. (I have to qualify it a bit, because
I'm not able to fix drivers, but if it's a Suspend2 issue, tell me and
I'll fix it).


[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-04-25 10:53    [W:0.804 / U:0.680 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site