From: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>
Subject: swsusp_suspend continues?
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 13:20:35 +1100
User-Agent: KMail/1.8.3
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <200603101704.AA00798@bbb-jz5c7z9hn9y.digitalinfra.co.jp> <20060313113631.GA1736@elf.ucw.cz> <20060315103711.GA31317@suse.de>
In-Reply-To: <20060315103711.GA31317@suse.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
To: "Undisclosed.Recipients":;
Message-Id: <200603161320.36051.kernel@kolivas.org>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1050
Lines: 28

Hi Pavel

I've been playing with hooking in the post resume swap prefetch code into 
swsusp_suspend and just started noting this on 2.6.16-rc6-mm1:
During the _suspend_ to disk cycle on this machine the swsusp_suspend function 
appears to continue beyond swsusp_arch_suspend as I get the same messages 
that I would normally get during a resume cycle such as this:

Suspending device platform
swsusp: Need to copy 14852 pages
Intel machine check architecture supported.
Intel machine check reporting enabled on CPU#0
and...
eth1: Coming out of suspend...
and so on

but then it manages to write to disk and power down anyway. Is this correct? 

If I put post_resume_swap_prefetch at the end of swsusp_suspend it hits that 
function on both resume _and_ suspend cycles. Am I missing something?

Cheers,
Con
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/