Am Mittwoch, 31. Januar 2007 09:49 schrieb Rafael J. Wysocki:
> On Wednesday, 31 January 2007 09:40, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch, 31. Januar 2007 09:33 schrieb Rafael J. Wysocki:
> > > On Tuesday, 30 January 2007 23:32, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >
> > > > Generally, you are safe if your
On Wednesday, 31 January 2007 09:40, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 31. Januar 2007 09:33 schrieb Rafael J. Wysocki:
> > On Tuesday, 30 January 2007 23:32, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> > > Generally, you are safe if your driver only calls wake_up() from a process
> > > context, but not from .
Am Mittwoch, 31. Januar 2007 09:33 schrieb Rafael J. Wysocki:
> On Tuesday, 30 January 2007 23:32, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > Generally, you are safe if your driver only calls wake_up() from a process
> > context, but not from .resume() or .suspend() routines (or from an
> > unfreezeable kernel
On Tuesday, 30 January 2007 23:32, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> [Added linux-pm to the Cc list, because I'm going to talk about things that
> I know only from reading the code.]
>
> On Tuesday, 30 January 2007 17:50, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > Am Dienstag, 30. Januar 2007 17:32 schrieb Rafael J. Wysoc
[Added linux-pm to the Cc list, because I'm going to talk about things that
I know only from reading the code.]
On Tuesday, 30 January 2007 17:50, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 30. Januar 2007 17:32 schrieb Rafael J. Wysocki:
> > However, you can always inspect the PF_FROZEN flag of the task
Am Dienstag, 30. Januar 2007 17:32 schrieb Rafael J. Wysocki:
> However, you can always inspect the PF_FROZEN flag of the tasks in question
> if that's practicable.
What would I do with that information? Ignore completion of IO?
Regards
Oliver
-
To unsubscribe from this li
On Tuesday, 30 January 2007 00:10, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Monday, 29 January 2007 22:21, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > On Mon, 2007-01-29 at 22:04 +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > > Am Montag, 29. Januar 2007 21:14 schrieb Nigel Cunningham:
> > > > Hi.
> > > >
> > > > On
Hi,
On Monday, 29 January 2007 22:21, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Mon, 2007-01-29 at 22:04 +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > Am Montag, 29. Januar 2007 21:14 schrieb Nigel Cunningham:
> > > Hi.
> > >
> > > On Mon, 2007-01-29 at 12:34 +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > > > Am Montag, 29. Janu
Hi.
On Mon, 2007-01-29 at 22:04 +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> Am Montag, 29. Januar 2007 21:14 schrieb Nigel Cunningham:
> > Hi.
> >
> > On Mon, 2007-01-29 at 12:34 +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > > Am Montag, 29. Januar 2007 12:24 schrieb Nigel Cunningham:
> > > > Hi.
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 20
Am Montag, 29. Januar 2007 21:14 schrieb Nigel Cunningham:
> Hi.
>
> On Mon, 2007-01-29 at 12:34 +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > Am Montag, 29. Januar 2007 12:24 schrieb Nigel Cunningham:
> > > Hi.
> > >
> > > On Mon, 2007-01-29 at 12:06 +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > ma
Hi.
On Mon, 2007-01-29 at 12:34 +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> Am Montag, 29. Januar 2007 12:24 schrieb Nigel Cunningham:
> > Hi.
> >
> > On Mon, 2007-01-29 at 12:06 +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > may a driver call wake_up() while doing resume() ?
> >
> > I assume you mean wak
Am Montag, 29. Januar 2007 12:24 schrieb Nigel Cunningham:
> Hi.
>
> On Mon, 2007-01-29 at 12:06 +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > may a driver call wake_up() while doing resume() ?
>
> I assume you mean waking a userspace process from drivers_resume(). If
> so, the answer is no - proc
Hi.
On Mon, 2007-01-29 at 12:06 +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> Hi,
>
> may a driver call wake_up() while doing resume() ?
I assume you mean waking a userspace process from drivers_resume(). If
so, the answer is no - processes will still be frozen at the point. In
the case of Suspend2, the LRU pag
13 matches
Mail list logo