Re: [RFC] New system device API

From: Pavel Machek (
Date: Mon Jun 09 2003 - 18:26:17 EST


> > > Can I bring up an issue a little off topic? Is it currently possible for
> > > us to say 'I want to suspend X but not Y?', and if so how is it done? I
> > > ask because someone recently mentioned the spinning up and down of IDE
> > > during swsusp. That occurs because we can (AFAIK) only say suspend
> > > everything at the moment. It would be good if we could put to sleep
> > > everything except your system devices and the devices used to write
> > > the
> >
> > Well, you need to suspend devices used to write the image, too, so you
> > have state to return to after resume. You only do not want disks to
> > spin down. Perhaps disk can just special-case it ("If I am going to
> > swsusp, I need to save state, but do not really need to spin down").
> Mmm. Sounds ugly though. Would it be fair to say we want to S5 some
> devices and S3 others? Perhaps that sort of terminology might be
> helpful.

It does not sound too ugly to me. We want to do the same thing to all
devices: save their state. Then we save the image and power them down
(all of them).

Whether "normal" devices are powered before or after saving state is
unimportant detail.

When do you have a heart between your knees?
[Johanka's followup: and *two* hearts?]
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jun 15 2003 - 22:00:22 EST