On Mon 2006-09-04 13:03:25, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:On Monday, 4 September 2006 11:08, Stefan Seyfried wrote:Hi,Hm, it already is in -mm, but of course I can prepare a patch that removes
sorry, i am only slowly catching up after vacation.
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 01:09:34PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:Change suspend_console() so that it waits for all consoles to flush theSorry, but no. Suspend and resume is already slow enough, no need to make
remaining messages and make it possible to switch the console suspending
off with the help of a Kconfig option.
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx>
+#ifndef CONFIG_DISABLE_CONSOLE_SUSPEND
/**
* suspend_console - suspend the console subsystem
*
@@ -709,8 +710,14 @@ int __init add_preferred_console(char *n
*/
void suspend_console(void)
{
+ printk("Suspending console(s)\n");
acquire_console_sem();
console_suspended = 1;
+ /* This is needed so that all of the messages that have already been
+ * written to all consoles can be actually transmitted (eg. over a
+ * network) before we try to suspend the consoles' devices.
+ */
+ ssleep(2);
both of them much slower.
If we can condition this on the netconsole being used, ok, but not for the
most common case of "console is on plain VGA".
this ssleep().
Pavel, what do you think?
Well, in suspend-to-ram case, 2 seconds is quite a lot... like more
than rest of suspend, so stefan has some point...