Re: Back to the future.

[david@lang.hm]

On Mon, 7 May 2007, Pavel Machek wrote:

> > > > Really? It works today... if the suspend is short
> > > > enough. And that's
> > > > how it should be.
> > >
> > > If we get very good at Wake-on-Lan it should work for
> > > any length
> > > of time.
> >
> > for suspend-to-ram this would work, I stand corrected.
> >
> > for hibernate this would almost certinly not work, and I
> > don't think that it's worth raising false hopes.
>
> Check the facts. It used to work, and it should work today.

I don't dispute that it sometimes works today.

what I dispute is that makeing it work should be a contraint on a cleaner 
design that happens to cause tcp connections to fail on suspend-to-disk 
(hibernate).

if you are dong suspend-to-disk for such a short period that TCP 
connections are able to recover (typically <15 min for most firewalls, in 
some cases <2 min for connections with keep-alive) is it really worth it?

and once you pass the timeframes where the connections are still alive 
then it shouldn't matter, and in fact the server should gracefully close 
the connections to be nice to other devices and servers on the network.

I dispute the idea that doing a suspend-to-disk and expecting that your 
network connections will recover when you wake up is a sane expectation.

David Lang
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/