Re: [PATCH 1/1] suspend: delete sys_sync()

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Friday, May 08, 2015 08:52:33 PM One Thousand Gnomes wrote:
> > > Some of this however is crappy suspend/resume handling. If the suspend
> > > subsystem was doing its job then for the cases of timeout triggered
> > > suspend it would have triggered most of the disk writes ten seconds
> > > before it tried to suspend properly ;-)
> > 
> > No problem, continue to use s2ram on your system -- and to the extent
> > that sync works, your data will be on disk.  (sync reliability is a
> > different topic...)
> 
> Ok let me ask the other obvious question. For all the mainstream
> distributions do their default tools and setup sync such that removing it
> from the kernel won't actually be noticable by users ?
> 
> If the answer is yes, then I shall shut up and stop worrying 8)

The distros I'm familiar with do that.  It has always been done traditionally
and I don't think anyone had enough guts to remove it from the scripts. :-)

We need to be more careful about Android as I said, but that can be addressed
by adding sync() to the autosleep thread.

Rafael

--
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/