Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 16 Dec 1999 12:49:27 -0800 (PST)
From:      Tom Bartol <bartol@salk.edu>
To:        Warner Losh <imp@village.org>
Cc:        Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Serious server-side NFS problem 
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.10.9912161244160.36287-100000@eccles.salk.edu>
In-Reply-To: <199912162042.NAA73909@harmony.village.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help


On Thu, 16 Dec 1999, Warner Losh wrote:

> In message <Pine.BSF.4.10.9912161235060.36287-100000@eccles.salk.edu> Tom Bartol writes:
> : IIRC it does update uptime properly after a suspend in 2.2.8 but does not
> : do so in 3.X and -current on my ThinkPad 770.
> 
> define correctly.  Eg, if I suspend for an hour it adds an hour?
> 
> Warner
> 

Yeah, that's what I meant by "correctly".  I don't recall seeing a
"thundering herd" effect afterwards.  Hmmm... which reminds me, I believe
this was not stock 2.2.8 but rather 2.2.8-PAO.  I had thought that the
lion's share of PAO code got merged into 3.0-current at some point.  When
I tried 3.0-current after this merge, suspend and resume worked fine on my
770 with the exception of uptime.

Tom




To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.10.9912161244160.36287-100000>