Hi!
> > Well.. it can write anywhere it wants (filesystem or not) as long as
> > the system is not going to be confused after resume by its caches not
> > matching on-disk state. I'd prefer it not to write anywhere at all.
>
> OK
>
> Please have a look at the current version of the patch (appended).
>
> I have followed the Nigel's suggestion not to change the current behavior
> in this patch (I'll add a couple of patches removing the freezability from
> some kernel threads), with one exception: I couldn't figure out any reason
> to have try_to_freeze() called in net/sunrpc/svcsock.c:svc_recv() .
It probably broke suspend at some point... leave it there. Processes
can stay in D period, waiting for NFS server to come back.
and yes, we want nfs threads frozen, too (and anything that talks to
network). Speaking to nfs servers while we are suspending the machine
is not nice, and if that continues after snapshot, we'll act as a very
confused machine to the outside...
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures)
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
