Re: Solving suspend-level confusion

[Nigel Cunningham]

Hi.

On Wed, 2004-08-04 at 14:14, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > If you want to tell me how I
> > could tell it to quiesce without spin down, I'll happily do that.
> 
> Very easy... with the current code, just use state 4 for the round
> of suspend callbacks, ide-disk will then avoid spinning down.

Hmm. That's what I was doing and do do for the remainder of the devices.
Oh well. I'll give it a try again. What would 3 do? (There was a stage
when all three implementations used 3; I've just played sheep in
changing to 4).

It occurs to me that I'm going to need to extend the partial tree
handling anyway. When I get this working, I'm going to want to resume
only the storage devices, and haven't added code for that yet.

Regards,

Nigel

-
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/