Re: swsusp in 2.6.16: works fine w/o PSE...

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> I'm CC-ing the two swsusp gurus ;)
> 
> > I was just feeling lucky and tried suspend-to-disk cycle
> > on my VIA C3 machine, which lacks PSE which is marked as
> > being required for swsusp to work.  After commenting out
> > the PSE check in include/asm-i386/suspend.h and rebooting,
> > I tried the whole cycle, several times, with real load
> > (while running 3 kernel compile in parallel) and while
> > IDLE... And surprizingly, it all worked flawlessly for
> > me, without a single glitch...
> > 
> > So the question is: is PSE really needed nowadays?

I think so. Or can you prove that pagetables are not going to be
overwritten in wrong order in !PSE case?

Look at x86-64 how !PSE case can be solved, but it is a bit of code.

								Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-
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/