Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Fix up power managment in 2.6 | From | Alan Cox <> | Date | Wed, 03 Sep 2003 14:02:18 +0100 |
| |
On Maw, 2003-09-02 at 11:21, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > The whole point was to get rid of the old 2 step save_state, then > suspend model which didn't make sense. A saved state is only meaningful > as long as that state doesn't get modified afterward, so saving state > and suspending are an atomic operation.
Very old myth. In fact just about every scheduler on the planet exploits the fact this is untrue.
save state continue running doing scheduler stuff restore other state losing the state in the middle we dont need
Ditto with a lot of I/O devices. My audio save state and suspend can be seperated - I might play a little bit of a song twice but is that a bug ?
- 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/
| |