Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 09:59:47 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 09:59:31 -0500 Received: from chunnel.redhat.com ([199.183.24.220]:16367 "EHLO sisko.scot.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 09:59:12 -0500 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 14:59:01 +0000 From: "Stephen C. Tweedie" To: Andrew Morton Cc: Kamil Iskra , Mark Hahn , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Stephen Tweedie Subject: Re: Problems with APM suspend and ext3 Message-ID: <20011205145901.A11105@redhat.com> In-Reply-To:

<3C081D47.C931377B@zip.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <3C081D47.C931377B@zip.com.au>; from akpm@zip.com.au on Fri, Nov 30, 2001 at 03:59:03PM -0800 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, On Fri, Nov 30, 2001 at 03:59:03PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > Kamil Iskra wrote: > > > > I've long since known that the > > suspends are not completely reliable, even with ext2, particularly if > > there was some disk activity going to right before or during a suspend. > > Yup. It seems that your BIOS is being asked to suspend all devices > while there is still disk IO being performed. And it refuses to > suspend because the disk is still active. Yep. I'd still like to know exactly what the circumstances around this are: just what are the constraints which apm requires us to observe for successful suspend? I've never had a laptop fail to suspend due to this sort of problem with ext3, so it's obviously different from one apm implementation to the next. Cheers, Stephen - 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/