Ok. Now that I've actually done some work toward getting it to work with
Suspend2, I'll give a more cogent response to Christoph's approach.
I believe it can work, but the algorithm in freeze() is a bit of a
concern.
Checking whether the todo list is empty is fine while we're the only
user, but w
Hi.
On Mon, 2005-08-08 at 11:27, Con Kolivas wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Aug 2005 10:46 am, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > Sorry for the slow response. Busy still.
> >
> > On Sat, 2005-08-06 at 15:06, Patrick Mochel wrote:
> > > On Fri, 5 Aug 2005, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > > > Hi.
> > > >
> > >
On Mon, 8 Aug 2005 10:46 am, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> Hi.
>
> Sorry for the slow response. Busy still.
>
> On Sat, 2005-08-06 at 15:06, Patrick Mochel wrote:
> > On Fri, 5 Aug 2005, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > > Hi.
> > >
> > > I finally found some time to finish this off. I don't really like the
Hi.
Sorry for the slow response. Busy still.
On Sat, 2005-08-06 at 15:06, Patrick Mochel wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Aug 2005, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
>
> > Hi.
> >
> > I finally found some time to finish this off. I don't really like the
> > end result - the macros looked clearer to me - but here goes.
On Fri, 5 Aug 2005, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I finally found some time to finish this off. I don't really like the
> end result - the macros looked clearer to me - but here goes. If it
> looks okay, I'll seek sign offs from each of the affected driver
> maintainers and from Ingo. Anyone
Hi.
I finally found some time to finish this off. I don't really like the
end result - the macros looked clearer to me - but here goes. If it
looks okay, I'll seek sign offs from each of the affected driver
maintainers and from Ingo. Anyone else?
Regards,
Nigel
drivers/acpi/osl.c |
Hi.
On Fri, 2005-07-22 at 05:42, Patrick Mochel wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
>
> > This patch implements freezer support for workqueues. The current
> > refrigerator implementation makes all workqueues NOFREEZE, regardless of
> > whether they need to be or not.
>
> A few
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> This patch implements freezer support for workqueues. The current
> refrigerator implementation makes all workqueues NOFREEZE, regardless of
> whether they need to be or not.
A few comments..
> Signed-off by: Nigel Cunningham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
Hi!
> > > +struct task_struct *kthread_create(int (*threadfn)(void *data),
> > > +void *data,
> > > +const char namefmt[], ...)
> > > +{
> > > + char result[TASK_COMM_LEN];
> > > +
> > > + va_list args;
> > > + va_start(args, namefmt);
> > >
* Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > +struct task_struct *kthread_create(int (*threadfn)(void *data),
> > + void *data,
> > + const char namefmt[], ...)
> > +{
> > + char result[TASK_COMM_LEN];
> > +
> > + va_list args;
> > +
Hi!
> This patch implements freezer support for workqueues. The current
> refrigerator implementation makes all workqueues NOFREEZE, regardless of
> whether they need to be or not.
>
> While this doesn't appear to have caused any problems with swsusp (ie
> Pavel's version) to date, this is no gua
11 matches
Mail list logo
