Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 21 Jul 2007 17:29:29 +0100 | From | Ken Moffat <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] what should 'uptime' be on suspend? |
| |
On Sat, Jul 21, 2007 at 09:54:37AM -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote: > > So is setting it to a random number considered correct behavior? Any of > the first three values I mentioned would make sense, but the value I see > is neither time since resume, time since power-on to do the resume, or > any of the logical uptime values. That was the whole point of the > original post, the uptime reported makes no sense at all. > I assumed you had booted for a short time, suspended, resumed, and then noticed the uptime was longer than time since resume.
If you think there is a bug it might help to do a cold boot, at some point note uptime and then immediately suspend, resume some time later, immediately note uptime (including local time), keep it running, and later monitor uptime against local time (i.e. the local time will let you know the change you expect to see in uptime). You might also want to confirm that the local time is maintained correctly.
Ken -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce - 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/
| |