> > > Probably we have multiple option. but I don't think GFP_NOIO is good > > > option. It assume the system have lots non-dirty cache memory and it isn't > > > guranteed. > > > > Basically nothing is guaranteed in this case. However, does it actually make > > things _worse_? > > Hmm.. > Do you mean we don't need to prevent accidental suspend failure? > Perhaps, I did misunderstand your intention. If you think your patch solve > this this issue, I still disagree. but If you think your patch mitigate > the pain of this issue, I agree it. I don't have any reason to oppose your > first patch. One question. Have anyone tested Rafael's $subject patch? Please post test result. if the issue disapper by the patch, we can suppose the slowness is caused by i/o layer. _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
