On 15 April 2014 14:18, Pavel Machek <pa...@ucw.cz> wrote: > On Tue 2014-04-15 21:54:53, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >> What I'm basically saying is that I see no reason for ARM to do something >> different to what x86 does. >> >> What is pretty clear to me is that ARM is compatible with x86, which is >> compatible with kernel/reboot.c, and it's the hibernate code which is >> the odd one out. > > I'm pretty sure the original code did not return. Anyway, the best > solution, given how many platforms are out there, would be to > > a) document that it should not return > > b) fix hibernation to handle the returning case, anyway.
Thanks Russell and Pavel! This sounds fine to me. Any objections? Thanks! Sebastian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/