Re: [pm] fix time after suspend-to-*

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> > Not sure... We do not want applications to know. Certainly we can't
> > send a signal; SIGPWR already has some meaning and it would be bad to
> > override it.
> 
> You are correct that SIGPWR already has an assigned semantic.
> 
> However, I'm not convinced that we don't want applications to know.
> Others have mentioned timeouts of network connections, and there's other
> issues as well - for instance, on my laptop, it is almost guaranteed (due to my
> work habits) that if I were to suspend it, when it wakes up the network
> configuration would be *wrong*.  It's possible to intuit what the right
> config is by looking at the number of ethernets and their link state, but
> that requires a wakeup of *something* in userspace - blindly going on
> as if nothing happened simply won't work.
> 
> Would having a pair of 'sleep/wakeup' calls in /etc/inittab (similar to the
> powerfail/powerok pair) be a solution here?  

Patrick has a patch to send event down using "hotplug" system.

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