[arch-general] stability from pm-suspend ?
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
> 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
Stable and safe for me. Now, talking about HIBERNATE, on the other
More information about the arch-general