Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | From | "Rafael J. Wysocki" <> | Subject | Re: swsusp in 2.6.16: works fine w/o PSE... | Date | Fri, 26 May 2006 12:33:23 +0200 |
| |
Hi,
On Thursday 25 May 2006 23:43, Pavel Machek wrote: > > 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.
Well, on i386 it'll have to be more complicated, because on x86_64 we use 2 MB pages for the temporary 1-1 mapping.
Greetings, Rafael - 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) |