RE: Runlevel for Sleep?
From: Patrick Mochel <hidden>
Date: 2002-09-07 19:56:58
On Fri, 6 Sep 2002, Grover, Andrew wrote:
quoted
From: Patrick Mochel [mailto:mochel-3NddpPZAyC0@public.gmane.org] [1] Once upon a time (last May), I implemented a patch that overloaded the reboot(2) system call to initiate suspend transitions in a platform-specific manner (as per Linus's suggestion). This is in the resurrection queue and will probably resurface soon.Hmm. Maybe it would be cleaner to give sleep its own system call. Having reboot(2) overloaded with suspend functionality is a little non-intuitive. Just a thought.
That's what I did initially, but I was encouraged instead to overload reboot. And, it does make quite a bit of sense considering the following: - syscall numbers are few and very difficult to get. We'd be taking one that only makes sense on a subset of the x86 platforms out there and on a subset of the total architectures (though this subset accounts for probably 95% of the install base). - reboot(2) is a power transition. suspend(2) is a power transition. Conceptuallly, they're similar. They are functionally, too. - swsusp already has a hook in it. -pat ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of that same old cell phone? Get a new here for FREE! https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=sourceforge1&refcode1=vs3390