Re: Patch: linux-2.5.42/kernel/sys.c - warm reboot should not suspend devices

Russell King (rmk@arm.linux.org.uk)
Mon, 14 Oct 2002 00:15:52 +0100

On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 04:10:01PM -0700, Adam J. Richter wrote:
> I have no objection to replacing or supplementing the reboot
> notifier chain with a method in struct device_driver, but let's not
> overload these methods with ambiguous semantics. I do not want to
> call thirty functions that primarily return memory to various memory
> allocators, mark a bunch of inodes as invalid, and otherwise arrange
> things so that the kernel can smoothly continue to run user level
> programs when, in fact, we just want to pull the reset line on the
> computer.

And what about setups where you can't pull the reset line from software.
I have several machines here like that. And one of them needs software
to talk to the cards to put them back into a sane state before rebooting.

"rebooting" in this particular case is "turn MMU off, jump to location 0"

And I never said anything about needing to allocate memory to do this.
I agree with you that suspending devices on reboot _is_ silly. However,
that's not what I was proposing.

-- 
Russell King (rmk@arm.linux.org.uk)                The developer of ARM Linux
             http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/