> > Indeed. Actually, one could argue that it's impossible to solve the
> > problem as long as we try to call out to userspace during suspend and
> > need to wait until that's finished, like in the case of sys_sync() and
> > fuse filesystems, and probably other cases. Maybe we should make *those*
> > calls return a failure so that the suspend isn't transparent inside the
> > kernel but is transparent to userspace.
>
> Well, it generally needs more consideration. :-)
>
> I think that we should introduce mechanisms that will allow us to notify all
> kernel subsystems, including FUSE and similar, that the system is going to
> enter a sleep state (one of those is the notifier chain introduced recently).
Ugh, please no.
Believe me, fuse is doing _nothing_ out of the ordinary, and should
not need special treatment during suspend/resume. If suspend itself
is doing something that triggers fuse activity, then that's a bug,
such as the sync() thing that started this thread.
> Then, they may react to such a notification by entering a "suspend" mode
> of operation in which they will return errors from some callbacks that
> otherwise should have succeeded etc. That depends on the subsystem in
> question.
Sounds horrible.
Why do we need to deal with subsystem interdependencies during
suspend? Isn't it about saving device state to ram? That definitely
_should not_ need to trigger anything that touches filesystems or
other subsystems.
Miklos
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
