Re: suspend to disk unreliable?
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 05:21:08PM +0000, Camaleón wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 18:22:48 +0200, lee wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 04:05:57PM +0000, Camaleón wrote:
>
> >> Where did you get that steps to hibernate? :-?
> >
> > It's in the kernel dokumentation, see Documentation/power/swsusp.txt.
>
> Then you should read about how to debugg "swsusp" when restoration
> fails :-)
The resuming didn't fail, but shortly after, the computer froze. It'll
have to be seen if there are any logfile entries in such a case. But
it's not something to play around with because it means a risk to lose
data.
> You should try all of them and choose the one that
> works better for your hardware configuration.
This isn't something for playing trial and error. If you were to buy a
car and the dealer told you that there are several ways to turn off
the engine and that you need to figure out which way works best by
trial and error, the risk being that you lose the car altogether,
would you buy such a car?
> > Since the relevant directories under /etc are empty, there doesn't seem
> > to be anything special getting done when using pm-hibernate.
>
> Try ;-)
Why? It would be stupid to do the same thing again, expecting
different results.
> At least you will get all the errors dumped into "/var/log/pm-
> suspend.log".
maybe, probably not ...
> >> It seems you are reading the wrong paragrah... you should be interested
> >> in "s2disk", instead >:-)
> >
> > Yes, but doesn't the same apply when suspending to disk? The appropriate
> > state of the graphics card has to be recreated in both cases.
>
> pm-hibernate will care about that.
Without the required tools installed?
> > Yeah, see above, what's the difference making pm-hibernate more reliable
> > than what the kernel documentation suggests?
>
> They are different methods. I don't know the insides, just test both and
> keep the one that works better.
No, I want to know first :)
Reply to: