On Friday, 11 of January 2008, Pavel Machek wrote: > On Thu 2008-01-10 14:14:36, Johannes Berg wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2007-12-17 at 02:09 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > > > A subsequent patch will enable apm-emulation notification for suspends > > > triggered in any way by using the suspend notifications. This causes > > > the system to lock up between X being needed to switch away from the > > > VT and X already waiting for resume in the apm ioctl. > > > > > > This patch moves the console switch (if enabled) before the suspend > > > notification (and after the resume notification) to avoid this issue. > > > > I don't see this in the suspend git tree yet, anything wrong with it? > > Its pretty intrusive I'd say. And it is wrong; we'd prefer userspace > to know what we are doing; if they are told we are suspending, > userspace may be able to do something more clever than long console > switch. > > I'd prefer this not to go into mainline. Well, in uswsusp we do the console switch before the suspend notifiers (although from the user land). Rafael _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
