On Fri, 2007-04-27 at 14:09 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > Yes. Still, I'd like to rework your patch to deal with ACPI without > introducing hibernate_ops . I'm going to do this later today if you don't > mind. :-) Not at all :) That's why I actually sent it out instead of just saying "well I give up it breaks user.c" johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
- References:
- Re: suspend2 merge (was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: CFS and suspend2: hang in atomic copy)
- From: Pavel Machek <[email protected]>
- Re: suspend2 merge (was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: CFS and suspend2: hang in atomic copy)
- From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[email protected]>
- Re: suspend2 merge (was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: CFS and suspend2: hang in atomic copy)
- From: Johannes Berg <[email protected]>
- Re: suspend2 merge (was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: CFS and suspend2: hang in atomic copy)
- From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[email protected]>
- Re: suspend2 merge (was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: CFS and suspend2: hang in atomic copy)
- Prev by Date: Re: suspend2 merge (was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: CFS and suspend2: hang in atomic copy)
- Next by Date: [patch 06/10] unprivileged mounts: put declaration of put_filesystem() in fs.h
- Previous by thread: Re: suspend2 merge (was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: CFS and suspend2: hang in atomic copy)
- Next by thread: Re: suspend2 merge (was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: CFS and suspend2: hang in atomic copy)
- Index(es):