[ltp] Running with line power and no battery

[Henrique de Moraes Holschuh]

On Thu, 28 Feb 2008, chris@idlelion.net wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Feb 2008, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
>> (and I do NOT trust sleep-to-disk).
>
> Wow. I'm stunned.

Let's just say I have tracked ext3 data corruption to the old suspend2
stuff, and found out the maintainer didn't have a clue it was happenning
because he was not using a 32-bit kernel anymore.

Besides, the whole way Linux wakes up from STD on ACPI systems is broken
beyond repair, we need to boot a *single* kernel, not fully boot an ACPI
kernel to boot another ACPI kernel without sharing the full ACPI state
between the two kernels.  When that gets fixed (and it will, but don't
expect it to happen anytime soon), I will use STD again.

> Of course, I always save any open files, and maybe I've been lucky, but  
> once suspend/resume works, in my experience it works every time.

Well, suspend-to-RAM works like a swiss clockwork, here.  STD didn't, and
after I started looking into exactly why it was happening, I gave up in
disgust.

But it *is* being cleaned up (Linus putting down his foot that the entire
codepaths for STR and STD were not to be shared anymore and for people to
stop trying to shoehorne what are two very different things into one another
just because they both have "sleep" in their name helped wonders!).

> For you, YOU, to be so emphatically untrusting of it is worrisome.

Hey, if it works for you, don't stop using it on my account.  It won't
suddenly break because the moon phase changed.  If it is working, it will
keep working.  But do test it with care at every new kernel version, I
started gettign fs corruption because the old suspend2 did not get updated
somewhere due to some weird VFS or pagecache changes that mattered a lot
more on 32-bit than 64-bit.

Now that tux-on-ice uses a lot more of stuff that is already in mainline,
the risk of such stuff happening should be somewhat smaller.  And there is
also uswsp (or whatever it is called), which I didn't like because it took
so much time to write uncompressed images to disk, that a cold boot was
almost as fast, and much safer.

> Then again, that's why we all make backups, right?

Right!  But I dislike the idea of needing to reinstall the computer when I
am in such a hurry that I did an STD instead of powering the box off.  It is
the absolute worst time for something to break in my usage patterns :-)

-- 
  "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
  them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
  where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
  Henrique Holschuh