Hi. On Wed, 2007-05-30 at 16:04 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Wednesday, 30 May 2007 15:17, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > On Wed, 2007-05-30 at 13:40 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > > On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 01:49:21PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > > > > (Trimmed the Cc:s quite heavily - I think this has gone somewhere beyond > > > the original point) > > > > > > > Notice that we want to be able to suspend while hibernating -- for > > > > suspend to both behaviour. So drivers may _not_ rely on system being > > > > runnable. > > > > > > So keep the driver layers read-only and unfreeze the processes after > > > doing the atomic copy. > > > > I know you probably won't care, but that's not an option for Suspend2 - > > I get the possibility of a full image by overwriting LRU pages that were > > saved prior to the atomic copy. > > This generally is a problem, not only for suspend2. :-) > > Once you've unfrozen the user land, we can't rely on the hibernation image any > more, because some tasks may cause the on-disk filesystems' state to change.
True. I understood, perhaps wrongly, that when Matthew spoke of keeping the drivers layers read-only, he was meaning stopping filesystem changes by some other means. Regards, Nigel
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
