Hi. On Wed, 2007-02-07 at 09:25 -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > On Wed, 07 Feb 2007, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > Ok, as far as usage scenario goes, that's fair enough. But as to the > > solution, I wonder though whether it's making life more complicated than > > it needs to be. After all, we should also be able to cope okay with > > having the power suddenly go out. If we can cope with that, cleaning > > filesystems prior to suspending should be a non-issue. > > We don't cope okay with the power going out, at all. And as an user case, a > need for fsck if you do something that is a reasonable use case (unplugging > devices while suspended) is not okay, either.
Maybe it depends on the filesystem you use. I've used ext3 for 6 or so years of development on Suspend2, and it's never given me a single problem, despite the fact that I've sometimes done the equivalent of pulling the plug without a sync or unmount. I did try XFS at one stage. It's performance was better, but it did give problems. Nevertheless, I'm more than happy to make the above claim about ext3. > > Likewise with changes in hardware. Once hotplugging support is mature, > > suspending, switching around hardware and resuming should just result in > > hot[un]plug events. > > Well, if we add *move* events for when someone unplugs a usb stick in one > port and replugs it in another while the system is in lala-land... maybe :-) > It would be normal to do it, when dealing with docks. Isn't that part of the point to having those uuid thingys? I hate them at the moment (from the point of view of suspend code), but hopefully they'll end up being nicer to deal with. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/