Re: Suspend 2 merge: 21/51: Refrigerator upgrade.

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> > > > > Included in this patch is a new try_to_freeze() macro Andrew M suggested
> > > > > a while back. The refrigerator declarations are put in sched.h to save
> > > > > extra includes of suspend.h.
> > > > 
> > > > try_to_freeze looks nice. Could we get it in after 2.6.10 opens?
> > > 
> > > I'm hoping to get the whole thing in mm once all these replies are dealt
> > > with. Does that sound unrealistic?
> > 
> > Yes, a little ;-).
> 
> I'm not talking about talking about problems and then doing nothing :>
> I'm writing a list of changes as I look at each of these responses.
> Assuming they're all addressed (or not changed for good reasons), and
> the code is actually useful, why shouldn't it go into mm?

It has chance to go into mm, but I do not think all 51 patches will go
at once. And I expect few more rounds of patches / comments. (And then
some patch / "it is too big" flamewar, too :-).

> > Silently doing nothing when user asked for sync is not nice,
> > either. BUG() is better solution than that.
> 
> I don't think we should BUG because the user presses Sys-Rq S while
> suspending. I'll make it BUG_ON() and make the Sys_Rq printk & ignore
> when suspending. Sound reasonable?

Yes, that's better. ... only that it means just another hook somewhere
:-(.
								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/