suspend/hibernate on desktops

Dave Jones davej at
Tue Jan 17 00:12:57 UTC 2006

On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 09:17:01AM +1100, Bojan Smojver wrote:
 > Quoting Dave Jones <davej redhat com>:
 > >Most of the diff between in-kernel suspend and suspend2 is
 > >the bells & whistles like compression, splash screens, etc.
 > If that were true, then vanilla suspend code would work on my notebook 
 > but it would just be uglier and slower. However, it isn't just uglier 
 > and slower, it also hangs my X consistently on resume.
 > The internals of suspend2 are explained in the file 
 > Documentation/power/internals.txt, once you apply the patch. I'm no 
 > kernel hacker, but it looks like the algorithms for doing things have 
 > been changed - it's not just spit and polish.

Note I said 'most'.  The fundamentals aren't that different.
And as you noted, with a lot of suspend2 being moved to userspace,
and upstream headed in the same direction, the delta between
the two implementations should continue to shrink.

 > In conclusion, I wouldn't just dismiss suspend2 to as some redundant 
 > patch. It makes many real systems actually suspend and resume, unlike 
 > the vanilla code.

I never dismissed it.
But the end goal should be 'make vanilla work', not 'rely on patching
a kernel every time an update comes out' or 'make alternative kernels


More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list