[lkml]   [2004]   [Mar]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: swsusp problems [was Re: Your opinion on the merge?]

    > > Now I have _proof_ that eye-candy is harmfull. What is see on screen is:
    > No, that's not proof; just a bug in the code. It's not using the right
    > code to display the error message. I'll fix it asap.


    I'd really like eye-candy code to be gone. Its long, and its not worth
    the trouble.

    > > N
    > > umber of free pages a[ ]h! (285723 != 285754)
    > > (Press SPACE to continue)
    > By thw way, to get this message, you probably removed the memory pool
    > hooks. I'm getting the picture more and more clearly. I need to write a
    > series of emails explaining why each part of the changes exists. I'll
    > try to do that shortly.

    No, this was actually with unmodified swsusp2. [I'm not sure if
    highmem was enabled at that point. I do not think it was.]

    > > Was it really neccessary to rename IOTHREAD to NOFREEZE? This way you
    > Not really, but I felt that IOTHREAD wasn't a good description of the
    > way the flag is used. The name implies that it is intended for threads
    > used for doing I/O, but it is also used for some threads that aren't I/O
    > related but cannot/should not be refrigerated.

    I agree that NOFREEZE is better name. Try submitting separate patch to
    rename it; if it gets rejected, modify swsusp2 to use IOTHREAD name...

    > > if (likely(!(current->state & (TASK_DEAD | TASK_ZOMBIE)))) {
    > > if (unlikely(in_atomic())) {
    > > - printk(KERN_ERR "bad: scheduling while
    > > atomic!\n");
    > > - dump_stack();
    > > + if (likely(!(software_suspend_state &
    > > + printk(KERN_ERR "bad: scheduling while
    > > atomic!\n");
    > > + dump_stack();
    > > + }
    > > }
    > > }
    > >
    > > Were you lazy or is there some reason why scheduling while atomic is
    > > not bad for swsusp2?
    > I like the way you're forcing me to remember why I've done things the
    > way I have :>. I'll need to get look at this again and get back to you.
    > There is a good reason and I did try to avoid doing this. I just don't
    > remember the logic right now.

    Not enough comments, then :-). [I wish I had followed swsusp2
    development more closely, but I guess its too late for that by now.]

    > Thanks for the comments. I really appreciate them.

    I'm looking forward to better swsusp2.
    When do you have a heart between your knees?
    [Johanka's followup: and *two* hearts?]
    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 14:01    [W:0.025 / U:20.956 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site