Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Fri, 6 Aug 2004 23:11:52 +0200 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: -mm swsusp: fix highmem handling |
| |
Hi!
> > I'm not sure why you are saving state before save_processor_state. > > swsusp_arch_resume will overwrite this, anyway. Is it to make something > > balanced? > > Yes, so it matches the calls in swsusp_suspend() - Previously there was a > hack that did kernel_fpu_end() after calling save_processor_state(), to > pass in_atomic() checks. By restoring the state after we've snapshotted on > suspend prevents this from being a problem.
> In general, if we assume that save_processor_state() does anything to the > CPU, besides just benign register saving, we have to make sure that it's > put into the same state on resume before we restore state..
Perhaps comment is needed there? "state saved by this is ignored, but save_processor_state changes preempt count"?
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/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |