On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 05:09:10PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > Is this the same thing the per-device IO-queue-freeze patches for
> > >HDAPS also
> > > need to do? If so, you may want to talk to Elias Oltmanns
> > > <eo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> about it. Added to CC.
> >
> > Thanks for the heads up Henrique. Even though these issues seem to be
> > related up to a certain degree, there probably are some important
> > differences. When suspending a system, the emphasis is on leaving the
> > system in a consistent state (think of journalled file systems), whereas
> > disk shock protection is mainly concerned with stopping I/O as soon as
> > possible. As yet, I cannot possibly say to what extend these two
> > concepts can be reconciled in the sense of sharing some common code.
>
> Actually, I believe requirements are same.
>
> 'don't do i/o in dangerous period'.
>
> swsusp will just do sync() before entering dangerous period. That
> provides consistent-enough state...
As I've said many times before - if the requirement is "don't do
I/O" then you have to freeze the filesystem. In no way does 'sync'
prevent filesystems from doing I/O.....
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
|