Re: suspend2 merge (was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: CFS and suspend2:hang in atomic copy)

[Adrian Bunk]

On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 12:38:47PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> 
> On Wed, 25 Apr 2007, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > > 
> > > .. but if the alternative is a feature that just isn't worth it, and 
> > > likely to not only have its own bugs, but cause bugs elsewhere? (And yes, 
> > > I believe STD is both of those. There's a reason it's called "STD". Go 
> > > to google and type "STD" and press "I'm feeling lucky". Google is God).
> > 
> > Is there really no use case for STD?
>...
> I'd actually be happier *removing* STD support in the sense it is now: 
> it's way too closely integrated with STR, even though it has absolutely 
> nothing in common with it. When you STD, you'e actually much closer to a 
> *shutdown* than to STR, yet the STD code continually seems to want to be 
> in the "suspend" path, as shown even by its name.
> 
> So my objections to STD have nothing to do with saving state and shutting 
> down. They have everything to do with the fact that it is not - and will 
> never be - a "suspend", and it shouldn't affect suspend.
>...

There are two completely different points:
- I say that the feature STD has use cases where STR is not a replacement
- you say you dislike the current implementation of STD

For me it was a serious regression if STD was removed without any 
replacement.

If someone would replace the STD implementation with what you want it to 
be I wouldn't care and you were happy.

> 		Linus

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

-
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/