[arch-general] stability from pm-suspend ?

Ng Oon-Ee ngoonee at gmail.com
Wed Apr 21 01:29:46 CEST 2010

On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 22:37 +0800, Ian-Xue Li wrote:
> I've been using pm-suspend for temporarily shutting down the computer
> for later use, but now I raised the question whether it is safe or
> stable to do so at a constant basis. That is, seldom real reboots and
> often just suspend.
> For me the ratio of reboot and suspend is like 1:5.
As others have replied, I suspend regularly, getting days or maybe a
week or so of 'uptime' on my laptop before bothering to reboot (normally
kernel or X related, since i use nvidia's driver restarting X doesn't
ALWAYS work).
> As you know that suspend don't really unmount the drives to read-only
> before it goes into suspension, when resumption had failed, you usually
> need to repair it and check for errors. This is at least the case for me
> when I use ext4.
> Even if it did resume successfully, I started to wonder if it also would
> harm the filesystems.
No, no harm noticed. What I DON'T do is suspend with many or even any
programs open (besides background daemons and stuff like
conky/rainlendar). No reason to, I'm anal that way to Alt-F4 everything
first. This has the side benefit of protecting me against a possible
non-resume (which hasn't happened in months).
> I really like to hear some experiences whether that you have been using
> ACPI S3 kernel suspension for quite some time now, and feels it is
> really stable and safe to use, or that, you had ran into troubles using
> them.
Stable and safe for me. Now, talking about HIBERNATE, on the other

More information about the arch-general mailing list