Re: [linux-pm] [RFC] why do we need run disk sync before entering S3

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> > > > > I did some S3 tests on an eeepc901, the total suspend time(from issue
> > > > > the suspend command to power down) is about 2.5s~3s.
> > > > > something interesting is that kernel runs disk sync before entering S3
> > > > > state, and this takes about 0.7~1.2s.
> > > > > my question is that, why do we need this for s2ram?
> > > > > can we remove this and run sys_sync for S4 only?
> > > > 
> > > > At the risk of sounding foolish, I'd guess that a system in S3 (or more
> > > > generally, suspend-to-RAM) is a lot more at risk of losing power or
> > > > failing to restore than a normally running system.  (A normally running
> > > > system is trivially not at risk of failing to restore!)  Consequently
> > > > it makes sense to flush the I/O buffers before entering this state, to
> > > > minimize the potential for loss of data.
> > > > 
> > > > When you think about it, a system in S4 is actually _less_ likely to 
> > > > run into trouble than one in S3, since it can't fail because of loss of 
> > > > power.  So if anything, we should remove the disk sync from hibernation 
> > > > and leave it in system suspend.
> > > 
> > > I generally agree, but I think we may also leave the syncing to the user space,
> > > in both cases.
> > 
> > Well...
> > 
> > Normally kernel writes dirty data to disk each 30
> > seconds. s2ram/s2disk breaks that promise, so it seems fair to add
> > explicit sync to keep the "promise".
> > 
> > OTOH, I agree it would be more flexible if we left sync to
> > userspace. In uswsusp case, it actually makes sense. In s2ram
> > case... if we can do it while keeping compatibility with old
> > behaviour... why not.
> 
> That really depends on the distrubution.  (open)SUSE always syncs before
> suspend/hibernation AFAICS, but I don't know about the other distros.

At least I ran into habit of running "echo mem > /sys/power/state"
manually on zaurus. I guess nontrivial ammount of people have custom
scripts that may or may not sync...

Anyway, if distro already ran sync, additional one is likely to be
very fast.
									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-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux IBM ACPI]     [Linux Power Management]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux Laptop]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux