Re: suspend2 merge (was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: CFS and suspend2: hang in atomic copy)
From: Pavel Machek
Date: Wed Apr 25 2007 - 17:46:40 EST
> > > And no, "three different implementations" doesn't cut it. Even _two_ is
> > > too much. We need to get *rid* of something, not add more.
> > swsusp can be dropped. It is nice -- self contained, extremely easy to
> > setup, Andrew likes it. uswsusp has all the features, and pretty
> > elegant design. With klibc (or some way to ship userland code with
> > kernel, and put it into initramfs or something) we can reasonably drop
> > swsusp.
> Well, I think we still need it and will need it in the future, at least for
> debugging. Moreover, I think there are many users of it.
> Let's not drop things that are helping us. :-)
Yes, it is very nice for debugging. But if I _had_ to choose, I'd
rather remove swsusp than uswsusp.
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
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/