On Fri, 25 May 2007, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > First, let me agree with you that for the atomic copy itself, the > freezer is unnecessary. Disabling irqs and so on is enough to ensure the > atomic copy is atomic. I don't think any of us are arguing with you > there. First off, realize that the problem actually happens during suspend-to-ram. Think about that for a second. In fact, think about it for a _loong_ time. Because dammit, people seem to have a really hard time even realizing this. There is no "atomic copy". There is no "checkpointing". There is no "spoon". > Hope this helps. Hope _the_above_ helps. Why is it so hard for people to accept that suspend-to-ram shouldn't break because of some IDIOTIC issues with disk snapshots? And why do you people _always_ keep mixing the two up? Linus - 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/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: pcmcia resume 60 second hang. Re: [patch 00/69] -stable review
- From: Nigel Cunningham <nigel@nigel.suspend2.net>
- Re: pcmcia resume 60 second hang. Re: [patch 00/69] -stable review
- References:
- Re: [patch 00/69] -stable review
- From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
- Re: [patch 00/69] -stable review
- From: Romano Giannetti <romanol@upcomillas.es>
- Re: [patch 00/69] -stable review
- From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
- pcmcia resume 60 second hang. Re: [patch 00/69] -stable review
- From: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
- Re: pcmcia resume 60 second hang. Re: [patch 00/69] -stable review
- From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
- Re: pcmcia resume 60 second hang. Re: [patch 00/69] -stable review
- From: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
- Re: pcmcia resume 60 second hang. Re: [patch 00/69] -stable review
- From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
- Re: pcmcia resume 60 second hang. Re: [patch 00/69] -stable review
- From: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
- Re: pcmcia resume 60 second hang. Re: [patch 00/69] -stable review
- From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
- Re: pcmcia resume 60 second hang. Re: [patch 00/69] -stable review
- From: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
- Re: pcmcia resume 60 second hang. Re: [patch 00/69] -stable review
- From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
- Re: pcmcia resume 60 second hang. Re: [patch 00/69] -stable review
- From: Nigel Cunningham <nigel@nigel.suspend2.net>
- Re: [patch 00/69] -stable review
- Prev by Date: Re: pcmcia resume 60 second hang. Re: [patch 00/69] -stable review
- Next by Date: Re: pcmcia resume 60 second hang. Re: [patch 00/69] -stable review
- Previous by thread: Re: pcmcia resume 60 second hang. Re: [patch 00/69] -stable review
- Next by thread: Re: pcmcia resume 60 second hang. Re: [patch 00/69] -stable review
- Index(es):
![]() |