Re: Suspend 2 merge: 34/51: Includes

[Nigel Cunningham]

Hi.

On Thu, 2004-11-25 at 10:19, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Nigel Cunningham <ncunningham@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > I can see that it might look that way, but it's actually fundamental to
> > the support for building as modules (which is required for LVM &
> > encryption), and has been really helpful in creating clear distinctions
> > between the different parts of suspend. It also provides a clear method
> > for someone to add support for their new wizz-bang storage method or
> > compressor.
> 
> I'm not entirely clear on this. Surely all that's needed for LVM and
> encryption support is for that to be set up in userspace and then allow
> userspace to trigger a second attempt at resume? I have a hacky patch
> for swsusp that allows that (at the moment it just adds a "resume"
> method to /sys/power/state), which gives you the functionality without
> the module pain.

Yes, sorry. I'm confusing initrd/ramfs support with modules. You can
resume from an initrd/ramfs without building as modules.

Regardless, building support as modules does have the other advantages
noted above, and I haven't found adding support for building as modules
to be a pain at all.

Sorry again for confusing the issue.

Nigel
-- 
Nigel Cunningham
Pastoral Worker
Christian Reformed Church of Tuggeranong
PO Box 1004, Tuggeranong, ACT 2901

You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ
died for the ungodly.		-- Romans 5:6

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/