On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 2:11 PM, Chris Murphy <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Last I checked (few months), Fedora's kernels inhibit hibernation when > Secure Boot is enabled. That will limit testing to older systems, and > systems where users have disabled Secure Boot. > Secure boot resume from hibernation is an issue, it would be nice if it were fixed, but considering that we consider hibernate harmful (see below), no one is putting resources to it. > And also, the Fedora kernel team has been clear they don't have the > resources to triage hibernation related bugs in the kernel. On a > non-Secure Boot Macbook Pro, the hibernation image is corrupt 100% of > the time on resume, which fortunately the kernel detects and thus > rejects, but it slows down boot because it has to read kernel, > initramfs, and the hibernation image from swap, only to reject it and > then proceed with normal boot. And of course there's still data loss, > as the environment isn't restored. > This is the main issue. Hibernation is a horrible mess that works occasionally. It is almost completely unsupported, because it is so difficult to support across random hardware. Supposedly, the path going forward is to no longer need hibernation as it were, using other low power methods beyond suspend, but this requires new hardware. As it stands, hibernate fails more often than it works, and the result is data loss. > I think supporting hibernation is a neat idea, but it's insufficient. > It's not going to solve most cases of environment state being lost. > And when it doesn't work, users have no idea how to troubleshoot it, > how to file good bug reports. The UX is vastly better saying "nope, > everyone is SOL" rather than a fractured user based, with variable > failure modes, and ignored bug reports. > > So I'm gonna re-iterate that GNOME needs to support an application > state saving API. I don't know how good of a design it is, but Firefox > saves its own state and restores itself (usually). And LibreOffice has > some kind of autosave feature. That's what I'm thinking of, but > something standardized that all applications can opt into, to avoid > the problem of losing everything. This burden is placed on all iOS and > Android apps, they don't have hibernation and they don't have Save As > dialogs either. > I would really like to see this. We keep hibernation as an option in the kernel because it does work for *some* people. I would certainly not say the majority of people. If this auto hibernation is going to be an option, it should be opt in, not opt out. Ideally also not advertised. If Ubuntu seems to feel that hibernation is a priority for them, and actually put the resources into fixing the kernel for a majority of machines, that's great. I guess it means they might also put resources into the secure boot problem. Once it is working, we can re-evaluate the defaults in Fedora, but until then I am pretty strongly opposed to this being a default on, opt out thing. Justin > > Chris Murphy > _______________________________________________ > desktop mailing list -- desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to desktop-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ desktop mailing list -- desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to desktop-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
