Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 25 May 2006 23:43:54 +0200 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: swsusp in 2.6.16: works fine w/o PSE... |
| |
Hi!
> I'm CC-ing the two swsusp gurus ;) > > > I was just feeling lucky and tried suspend-to-disk cycle > > on my VIA C3 machine, which lacks PSE which is marked as > > being required for swsusp to work. After commenting out > > the PSE check in include/asm-i386/suspend.h and rebooting, > > I tried the whole cycle, several times, with real load > > (while running 3 kernel compile in parallel) and while > > IDLE... And surprizingly, it all worked flawlessly for > > me, without a single glitch... > > > > So the question is: is PSE really needed nowadays?
I think so. Or can you prove that pagetables are not going to be overwritten in wrong order in !PSE case?
Look at x86-64 how !PSE case can be solved, but it is a bit of code.
Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html - 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/
| |