On Mon, 29 Oct 2007, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Monday, 29 October 2007 22:30, Alan Stern wrote: > > Rafael: > > > > How does this patch look? Any reason not to have the resume notifiers? > > Yes. > > The userland interface already uses PM_HIBERNATION_PREPARE and > PM_POST_HIBERNATION for restore too, so if anything, we should call these > from software_resume() either. I could use those same notifiers, but are you sure that's a good idea? Drivers might want to do different things at the beginning of hibernation and the beginning of a restore. Alternatively, the user interface can be changed. The current organization is slightly illogical; there should be different ioctls for prepare-to-create-snapshot and prepare-to-restore-snapshot instead of a single SNAPSHOT_FREEZE for both. How about adding RESTORE_FREEZE and RESTORE_UNFREEZE; does this sound good? Alan Stern P.S.: While I'm updating things, the thought occurs that PM_RESTORE_PREPARE and PM_POST_RESTORE would be better names than PM_RESUME_PREPARE and PM_POST_RESUME. _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
