lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jul]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC] what should 'uptime' be on suspend?
Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 10:42:15AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>
>> man uptime:
>> uptime - tell how long the system has been running
>>
>> I claim that the system is not running when it is suspended,
>> so the suspension time should not be included in uptime.
>>
>>
> So, maybe I shouldn't have put corrected in inverted commas,
> because this was a real correction and my previous usage was an
> unintended side-effect of an error.
>
> Anyway, the current behaviour is known and I guess any attempt to
> change it (e.g. to what Bill was expecting) won't be well received.
>

So is setting it to a random number considered correct behavior? Any of
the first three values I mentioned would make sense, but the value I see
is neither time since resume, time since power-on to do the resume, or
any of the logical uptime values. That was the whole point of the
original post, the uptime reported makes no sense at all.

--
bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
CTO TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979

-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-07-21 15:57    [W:0.114 / U:1.792 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site