Linux: Rethinking Suspend and Resume
What started as the review of a bug report grew into an interesting debate as Linus Torvalds slammed the current suspend and resume [story] design in the Linux Kernel, "why the HELL cannot you realize that kernel threads are different? The right thing to do is AND HAS ALWAYS BEEN, to stop and start user threads only around the whole thing. Don't touch those kernel threads. Stop freezing them."
Later in the discussion, Linus noted that he had no interest in Suspend to Disk (STD), and was only interested in a working Suspend to Ram (STR) implementation. He noted that complexity introduced by STD was infecting the STR logic, and that the two should be completely separated.
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version
- 1714 reads
- PDF version
More in Tux Machines
- Highlights
- Front Page
- Latest Headlines
- Archive
- Recent comments
- All-Time Popular Stories
- Hot Topics
- New Members
digiKam 7.7.0 is releasedAfter three months of active maintenance and another bug triage, the digiKam team is proud to present version 7.7.0 of its open source digital photo manager. See below the list of most important features coming with this release. |
Dilution and Misuse of the "Linux" Brand
|
Samsung, Red Hat to Work on Linux Drivers for Future TechThe metaverse is expected to uproot system design as we know it, and Samsung is one of many hardware vendors re-imagining data center infrastructure in preparation for a parallel 3D world. Samsung is working on new memory technologies that provide faster bandwidth inside hardware for data to travel between CPUs, storage and other computing resources. The company also announced it was partnering with Red Hat to ensure these technologies have Linux compatibility. |
today's howtos
|
atang - paying customers ?
>> Its time to retire and let the paying customers demand the features in the operating system.
I am not sure what you mean by that statement ( or most of your statememts) - perhaps you are implying that linus should retire and let RH and suse co-opt linux, kernel and all ! Well, wel already have paying customers paying Sun, IBM and HP - why should they pay for a solaris wannabe ?
I am urging just the opposite - RH and Novell should shut the door and let linux again become a community project as it was MEANT to be and once was. RH has single-handedly done more damage to linux adoption than anyone, including m$ has. Linux can be commercialized WITHOUT RH, novell or canonical - look at firefox. In fact, commercial companies should only rally around a community version of linux - for e.g., Debian. This will ensure standardization and avoid lock-ins.
I have to agree with Linus
Although suspend to disk has been "working" on recent kernels ( for almost two years on mandriva) with some degree of reliability, I find it useless. It is not any faster to just boot the system and shutdown is actually faster than suspending. If you have a lot of applications in memory, the suspend takes much longer ( it MIGHT be slightly better than rebooting and restarting the apps). However, I do not trust the resume process as much as a clean boot. There were times when the mouse or keyboard simply doesn't work and I have to reboot anyway - its not worth risking the stability of the system.
Suspend to memory, OTOH, (when it doesn't corrupt the video) is quite reliable - I use it every day; in fact, several times a day.
I am not very confident about many people who are actually working on the kernel. Many of them lack experience and that can be seen from the fact that kernel development seems more focused on useless features rather than stability and reliability. Some of them (esp those 'hired' by redhat or novell) are openly driven by the agenda of RH, novell and such. Re the XFS corruption bug introduced in the kernel sometime after 2.6.15, I wouldn't put anything past RH. They have felt (their ext* which is crap) threatened by reiserfs and lately XFS so much that - well...
A contribution is just that !
You cannot give money to a charity and tell them what to do with it. Then it is NOT charity.
If linux has to be seen as a community project, it HAS to be a community project. If a co. does not like GPL, it should stop "contribution" to it. If it wants to help, it should send money to the project. That way, developers can work on the project, without being employed by the donors. And the project is not tainted.
If it is anything but that, then the so called GPL and open source bigots are merely working for 'the man'; it is just that the man ain't m$ but it is no different.