On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 8:16 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 08:00:55 PM Josh Boyer wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 7:52 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 11:04:46 AM Josh Boyer wrote: >> >> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> > On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >> On Friday, May 25, 2012, Josh Boyer wrote: >> >> >>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >>> >> commit b94887bbc0621e1e8402e7f0ec4bc3adf46c9a6e >> >> >>> >> Author: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> >> >> >>> >> Date: Fri Feb 17 12:42:08 2012 -0500 >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> Freeze all filesystems during system suspend and (kernel-driven) >> >> >>> >> hibernation by calling freeze_supers() for all superblocks and thaw >> >> >>> >> them during the subsequent resume with the help of thaw_supers(). >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> This makes filesystems stay in a consistent state in case something >> >> >>> >> goes wrong between system suspend (or hibernation) and the subsequent >> >> >>> >> resume (e.g. journal replays won't be necessary in those cases). In >> >> >>> >> particular, this should help to solve a long-standing issue that, in >> >> >>> >> some cases, during resume from hibernation the boot loader causes the >> >> >>> >> journal to be replied for the filesystem containing the kernel image >> >> >>> >> and/or initrd causing it to become inconsistent with the information >> >> >>> >> stored in the hibernation image. >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> The user-space-driven hibernation (s2disk) is not covered by this >> >> >>> >> change, because the freezing of filesystems prevents s2disk from >> >> >>> >> accessing device special files it needs to do its job. >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> This change is based on earlier work by Nigel Cunningham. >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> Rebased to 3.3-rc3 by Josh Boyer <jwboyer@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Did this patch ever wind up going anywhere? Fedora has it sitting in >> >> >>> our tree with a comment that says "rebase" and I don't see it in the >> >> >>> linux-next tree at all. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Did if fall through the cracks or was it NAKed somewhere? >> >> >> >> >> >> No, it wasn't in principle. There were some comments I haven't addressed yet. >> >> > >> >> > Dredging up a really old thread, sorry. >> >> > >> >> > We're still carrying this patch along in Fedora. Should we drop it at >> >> > this point, or is it still eventually going to head upstream? >> >> >> >> Fixed Rafael's email address. (Double sorry.) >> > >> > No biggie. >> > >> > I just hadn't got sufficient response for that patch at the time it was >> > submitted, so I guess it would be good to resubmit it. Please feel free to >> > do that if you want. >> >> You want me to resend a patch you authored back to you? I mean, I can >> do that but it seems a bit strange. All I did was rebase what you >> wrote to a newer kernel version. > > Well, you can send it to me in private then and I'll resubmit. :-) Done. Thanks. josh -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
