Re: suspend2 merge

[Martin Steigerwald]

Am Mittwoch 25 April 2007 schrieb Linus Torvalds:

> And that's a *fundamental* problem. If the STD people cannot even
> realize that they have less to do with "suspend" than to "reboot", how
> do you ever expect them to get anything to work, and not affect other
> things negatively?
>
> Yeah, I'm down on it. I'm down on it because every person involved with
> the whole STD thing seems to have basically zero taste, and a total
> inability to work with anybody else.

Hello Linus!

I am no kernel developer. But I understand what you are trying to tell 
here.

I agree that suspend to ram and snapshot should be handled differently by 
drivers. And unlike schedulers - whether it be I/O or process related 
ones - I think it should be quite easy to settle and decide on *one* 
implementation for each feature. It least it doesn't look as difficult as 
deciding on a scheduler which works for all the different workloads to 
me.

I do not believe that the reasons preventing this to happen until now are 
of pure technical nature.

I think snapshotting is a very important feature. I would patch it into my 
kernels if it was removed. But then I am using suspend2 anyway.

Regards,
-- 
Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de
GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA  B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7
-
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/