On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > or the userspace helper functions that setup the instructions for the > hibernate warn you if you are telling it to mount a filesystem that it > knows is ext3 and is in use by the system going to sleep.
One can argue that the ext3 implementation is inadequate. We should be able to give it a mount option requiring it to fail rather than play back the journal and write to the disk. > > What I've been trying to say from the very beginning is that the current > > frameworks _support_ hibernation a la ACPI S4 (although that's not exactly > > ACPI S4) and if we are going to introduce a new framework, then it should > > be designed to _support_ ACPI S4 fully _from_ _the_ _start_. > > here is where there is some disagreement (although it may just be > misunderstanding on the 'fully support' phrase) > > it sounds like you are saying that the ACPI support requires a lot of work > (the phrase I've seen some people use is a requirement to 'fix all the > drivers'). we aren't wanting to have this work prevent the non-ACPI > hibernation from progressing. You have completely misunderstood. That phrase "fix all the drivers" has nothing whatsoever to do with ACPI. It is a prerequisite for removing the freezer. And unless I'm mistaken, removing the freezer was the main reason for doing all this kexec-style work in the first place. Alan Stern - 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/
