Hi. On Wednesday 08 February 2006 09:05, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > > # cat /sys/power/disk_method > > > > swsusp uswsusp suspend2 > > > > # echo uswsusp > /sys/power/disk_method > > > > # echo > /sys/power/state > > > > > > > > Is there a big problem with that, which I've missed? > > > > > > Userland suspend is driven by the suspending application which only calls > > > the kernel to do things it cannot do itself, like freezing (the other) > > > processes, snapshotting the system etc. We use the /dev/snapshot > > > device and the ioctl()s in there, so no sysfs files are needed for that. > > > It's independent and can coexist with the existing sysfs interface > > > just fine. > > > > Yes, but how are you going to get it started from (say) klaptop, which only > > knows "echo disk > /sys/power/state" as the way of starting a suspend? I'm > > suggesting that we create a means whereby the issue of how to start a > > cycle could be separated from what implementation is used to do the work. > > That is, a simple extension at the start of the disk specific code that > > starts swsusp, uswsusp or suspend2 depending upon what you want. Maybe I > > should just prepare a patch. > > Please do not patch kernel for that. > > Proper solution is probably creating s2disk program/script, and teach > kpowersave/klaptop/etc. to just use it. Then s2disk can detect best > method to use ... and then just do it. You already have suitable > script, but I'm not sure what its name is. You have a good point there - the hibernate script is sufficient for the task. Ok. I'll give up on this idea and consider it their problem for not using what's provided already. Regards, Nigel -- See our web page for Howtos, FAQs, the Wiki and mailing list info. http://www.suspend2.net IRC: #suspend2 on Freenode
Attachment:
pgpMzTyIchGde.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- References:
- [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.
- From: Nigel Cunningham <[email protected]>
- Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- From: Nigel Cunningham <[email protected]>
- Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- From: Pavel Machek <[email protected]>
- [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.
- Prev by Date: Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- Next by Date: [2.6 patch] let IA64_GENERIC select more stuff
- Previous by thread: Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- Next by thread: Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.)
- Index(es):
 |