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

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> > > > > > 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
> > > > :-(.
> > > 
> > > :<. But we're only talking two or three lines. Let's keep it in
> > > perspective.
> > 
> > I think even three lines are bad. It means that swsusp is no longer
> > self-contained subsystem, but that it has its hooks all over the
> > place. And those hooks need to be maintained, too.
> 
> Yes, but suspending can't practically be a self contained system. We can
> try to convince ourselves that we're making it self contained by hiding
> behind the driver model, but in reality, the driver model is just a nice
> name for our sticky little fingers in all the other drivers, ensuring
> they do the right thing when we want to go to sleep. Hooks in other code
> is just the equivalent, but without the nice name. Perhaps I should
> invent one. How about the "quiescing subsystem"? :>

Actually, "quiescing subsystem" with defined (and documented!)
interface might be an improvement ;-).
								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/