> > In that case the "we need suspend to be invisible to userspace" as a > > reason to use the freezer would also be moot, since if you don't > > schedule userspace after offlining the CPUs, it can't notice this. > > After? Can you do the offlining atomically? Don't know. Wait for all CPUs to reach a scheduling point and then take them offline? Doesn't sound too difficult. 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/
- References:
- Re: [linux-pm] Re: [PATCH] Remove process freezer from suspend to RAM pathway
- From: Oliver Neukum <[email protected]>
- Re: malicious filesystems (was Re: [linux-pm] Re: [PATCH] Remove process freezer from suspend to RAM pathway)
- From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[email protected]>
- Re: malicious filesystems (was Re: [linux-pm] Re: [PATCH] Remove process freezer from suspend to RAM pathway)
- From: Miklos Szeredi <[email protected]>
- Re: malicious filesystems (was Re: [linux-pm] Re: [PATCH] Remove process freezer from suspend to RAM pathway)
- From: Oliver Neukum <[email protected]>
- Re: [linux-pm] Re: [PATCH] Remove process freezer from suspend to RAM pathway
- Prev by Date: Re: Please revert 21564fd2a3deb48200b595332f9ed4c9f311f2a7
- Next by Date: Re: [BUG] IT8212 libata driver *still* hard-freezes system on boot on 2.6.22 final.
- Previous by thread: Re: malicious filesystems (was Re: [linux-pm] Re: [PATCH] Remove process freezer from suspend to RAM pathway)
- Next by thread: Re: malicious filesystems (was Re: [linux-pm] Re: [PATCH] Remove process freezer from suspend to RAM pathway)
- Index(es):
 |