Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*XFS\s+and\s+ACPI\s+sleep\s+states\s+compat\s+in\s+2\.5\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*XFS\s+and\s+ACPI\s+sleep\s+states\s+compat\s+in\s+2\.5\s*$/: 12 ]

Total 12 documents matching your query.

1. XFS and ACPI sleep states compat in 2.5 (score: 1): Author: Karol Kozimor <sziwan@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 23:28:54 +0100; It seems that the XFS code (probably page_buf.c) doesn't have any support for ACPI sleep states (S3 a.k.a. Suspend-To-RAM, and S4 a.k.a. Suspend-To-Disk, or software suspend - swsusp). The problem s; /archives/xfs/2003-02/msg00277.html (9,009 bytes)
2. Re: XFS and ACPI sleep states compat in 2.5 (score: 1): Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 20:43:02 -0600 (CST); Hi Karol - I have actually never looked at this, but just doing some hacking-by-pattern-matching looks like maybe this is all that is needed in 2.5, assuming the patch for 2.4 works correctly: -- /us; /archives/xfs/2003-02/msg00283.html (10,499 bytes)
3. Re: XFS and ACPI sleep states compat in 2.5 (score: 1): Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 08:46:06 -0600 (CST); Does this behave differently with the patch vs. without? Are there any messages in the system logs before/after this? 990 is "EFSCORRUPTED" out of xfs, perhaps the filesystem has shut down. There sho; /archives/xfs/2003-02/msg00291.html (8,404 bytes)
4. Re: XFS and ACPI sleep states compat in 2.5 (score: 1): Author: Karol Kozimor <sziwan@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 17:04:04 +0100; Thus wrote Eric Sandeen: No. As I stated earlier, the issue was present with 2.5.59 and 2.5.60, so without your patch applied. Well, nothing here. The logs are silent. Is it possible for the filesyst; /archives/xfs/2003-02/msg00294.html (10,692 bytes)
5. XFS and ACPI sleep states compat in 2.5 (score: 1): Author: Karol Kozimor <sziwan@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 23:28:54 +0100; It seems that the XFS code (probably page_buf.c) doesn't have any support for ACPI sleep states (S3 a.k.a. Suspend-To-RAM, and S4 a.k.a. Suspend-To-Disk, or software suspend - swsusp). The problem s; /archives/xfs/2003-02/msg00761.html (9,009 bytes)
6. Re: XFS and ACPI sleep states compat in 2.5 (score: 1): Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 20:43:02 -0600 (CST); Hi Karol - I have actually never looked at this, but just doing some hacking-by-pattern-matching looks like maybe this is all that is needed in 2.5, assuming the patch for 2.4 works correctly: -- /us; /archives/xfs/2003-02/msg00767.html (10,499 bytes)
7. Re: XFS and ACPI sleep states compat in 2.5 (score: 1): Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 08:46:06 -0600 (CST); Does this behave differently with the patch vs. without? Are there any messages in the system logs before/after this? 990 is "EFSCORRUPTED" out of xfs, perhaps the filesystem has shut down. There sho; /archives/xfs/2003-02/msg00775.html (8,404 bytes)
8. Re: XFS and ACPI sleep states compat in 2.5 (score: 1): Author: Karol Kozimor <sziwan@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 17:04:04 +0100; Thus wrote Eric Sandeen: No. As I stated earlier, the issue was present with 2.5.59 and 2.5.60, so without your patch applied. Well, nothing here. The logs are silent. Is it possible for the filesyst; /archives/xfs/2003-02/msg00778.html (10,692 bytes)
9. XFS and ACPI sleep states compat in 2.5 (score: 1): Author: Karol Kozimor <sziwan@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 23:28:54 +0100; Hi, It seems that the XFS code (probably page_buf.c) doesn't have any support for ACPI sleep states (S3 a.k.a. Suspend-To-RAM, and S4 a.k.a. Suspend-To-Disk, or software suspend - swsusp). The proble; /archives/xfs/2003-02/msg01245.html (9,024 bytes)
10. Re: XFS and ACPI sleep states compat in 2.5 (score: 1): Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 20:43:02 -0600 (CST); Hi Karol - I have actually never looked at this, but just doing some hacking-by-pattern-matching looks like maybe this is all that is needed in 2.5, assuming the patch for 2.4 works correctly: -- /us; /archives/xfs/2003-02/msg01251.html (10,543 bytes)
11. Re: XFS and ACPI sleep states compat in 2.5 (score: 1): Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 08:46:06 -0600 (CST); Does this behave differently with the patch vs. without? Are there any messages in the system logs before/after this? 990 is "EFSCORRUPTED" out of xfs, perhaps the filesystem has shut down. There sho; /archives/xfs/2003-02/msg01259.html (8,462 bytes)
12. Re: XFS and ACPI sleep states compat in 2.5 (score: 1): Author: Karol Kozimor <sziwan@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 17:04:04 +0100; Thus wrote Eric Sandeen: No. As I stated earlier, the issue was present with 2.5.59 and 2.5.60, so without your patch applied. Well, nothing here. The logs are silent. Is it possible for the filesyst; /archives/xfs/2003-02/msg01262.html (10,846 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 12
Page: [1]