Re: -mm swsusp: fix highmem handling

[Pavel Machek]

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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/