[lkml]   [2005]   [Jun]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Freezer Patches.

> > > > 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.


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: 2005-06-02 09:18    [W:0.079 / U:3.704 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site