[lkml]   [2007]   [Jul]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [linux-pm] Re: [PATCH] Remove process freezer from suspend to RAM pathway
> > Well, but you did remove sys_sync() from the freezer, which is
> > and must be called in the hibernate path.
> That's not really true. We _want_ to call sys_sync() in both the
> hibernate and suspend paths (in case the batteries run down), to help
> avoid filesystem problems if something goes wrong with the resume. But
> it isn't a hard requirement.
> > > I'm not sure why this can't be made atomic, but assuming, that it
> > > can't, fuse should still not need to be implicated. If it is, that's
> > > an indication about something wrong in the suspend procedure.
> >
> > Nope, something's wrong in fuse. You must be able to deal with sync
> > until every task is frozen.
> That's ridiculous. FUSE itself runs partially as a user task. How can
> you expect it to carry out a sync or anything else when it is frozen?
> I suppose you could "deal" with it by having the kernel portion return
> an error if the userspace part is frozen. If the hibernate/suspend
> code bothered to check the return value, it would immediately abort
> the suspend.

I strongly believe, that we don't want to deal with it. If we want to
call sync(), do it while the system is fully operational. It's a best
effort thing anyway, and you can loose data in other ways if resume

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: 2007-07-03 22:23    [W:0.170 / U:2.476 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site