Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760291AbZCTS7U (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Mar 2009 14:59:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751898AbZCTS7I (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Mar 2009 14:59:08 -0400 Received: from atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz ([195.113.26.193]:56282 "EHLO atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754503AbZCTS7H (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Mar 2009 14:59:07 -0400 Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2009 19:58:51 +0100 From: Pavel Machek To: Li Yang Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: nonboot cpu on SMP suspend Message-ID: <20090320185851.GB1418@ucw.cz> References: <2a27d3730903172325w16ec329cp872ec35d100f6506@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <2a27d3730903172325w16ec329cp872ec35d100f6506@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 820 Lines: 19 On Wed 2009-03-18 14:25:32, Li Yang wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm curious why we need to un-plug all the nonboot cpus before suspend > and start them all over again after the suspend(ACPI sleep)?? I mean > if we can bring the booting cpu back to the exact state as before > suspend, why can't we just do the same for non-booting cpus?? And that > will be much faster. Any thought?? Thanks. Why do you think it will be faster? Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html -- 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/