On Fri, 25 May 2007, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
quoted text
> 
> First, let me agree with you that for the atomic copy itself, the
> freezer is unnecessary. Disabling irqs and so on is enough to ensure the
> atomic copy is atomic. I don't think any of us are arguing with you
> there.

First off, realize that the problem actually happens during 
suspend-to-ram.

Think about that for a second.

In fact, think about it for a _loong_ time. Because dammit, people seem to 
have a really hard time even realizing this.

	There is no "atomic copy".

	There is no "checkpointing".

	There is no "spoon".

quoted text
> Hope this helps.

Hope _the_above_ helps. Why is it so hard for people to accept that 
suspend-to-ram shouldn't break because of some IDIOTIC issues with disk 
snapshots?

And why do you people _always_ keep mixing the two up?

			Linus
-
unsubscribe notice
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/