Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 26 Nov 2004 00:25:19 +0100 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: Suspend 2 merge: 21/51: Refrigerator upgrade. |
| |
Hi!
> > > > > Included in this patch is a new try_to_freeze() macro Andrew M suggested > > > > > a while back. The refrigerator declarations are put in sched.h to save > > > > > extra includes of suspend.h. > > > > > > > > try_to_freeze looks nice. Could we get it in after 2.6.10 opens? > > > > > > I'm hoping to get the whole thing in mm once all these replies are dealt > > > with. Does that sound unrealistic? > > > > Yes, a little ;-). > > I'm not talking about talking about problems and then doing nothing :> > I'm writing a list of changes as I look at each of these responses. > Assuming they're all addressed (or not changed for good reasons), and > the code is actually useful, why shouldn't it go into mm?
It has chance to go into mm, but I do not think all 51 patches will go at once. And I expect few more rounds of patches / comments. (And then some patch / "it is too big" flamewar, too :-).
> > Silently doing nothing when user asked for sync is not nice, > > either. BUG() is better solution than that. > > I don't think we should BUG because the user presses Sys-Rq S while > suspending. I'll make it BUG_ON() and make the Sys_Rq printk & ignore > when suspending. Sound reasonable?
Yes, that's better. ... only that it means just another hook somewhere :-(. Pavel -- People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers... ...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl! - 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/
| |