Re: [RFC] what should 'uptime' be on suspend?

[Bill Davidsen]

Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 10:42:15AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>   
> > man uptime:
> > 	uptime - tell how long the system has been running
> >
> > I claim that the system is not running when it is suspended,
> > so the suspension time should not be included in uptime.
> >
> >     
>  So, maybe I shouldn't have put corrected in inverted commas,
> because this was a real correction and my previous usage was an
> unintended side-effect of an error.
>
>  Anyway, the current behaviour is known and I guess any attempt to
> change it (e.g. to what Bill was expecting) won't be well received.
>   

So is setting it to a random number considered correct behavior? Any of 
the first three values I mentioned would make sense, but the value I see 
is neither time since resume, time since power-on to do the resume, or 
any of the logical uptime values. That was the whole point of the 
original post, the uptime reported makes no sense at all.

--
bill davidsen <davidsen@xxxxxxx>
 CTO TMR Associates, Inc
 Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979

-
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/