Hi! > > > That's a no-no. ATOMIC alocations can fail, and no, WARN_ON is not > > > enough. It is not a bug, they just fail. > > > > But like I said in my post, there's no way we can disable suspend to > > disk when they do, right now anyway. Also, this can't be called any > > later than a late initcall or such since it's __init, and thus there > > shouldn't be memory pressure yet that would cause this to fail. > > Exactly. If an atomic allocation fails at this stage, there is a bug IMHO > (although not necessarily in our code). Ok, so just do a BUG(). WARN_ON(), then do something subtly wrong during suspend is evil. Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
