Re: [0/48] Suspend2 2.1.9.8 for 2.6.12

[Nigel Cunningham <ncunningham@cyclades.com>]

Hi.

On Fri, 2005-07-08 at 04:54, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Thursday, 7 of July 2005 14:49, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > Nigel Cunningham <ncunningham@cyclades.com> wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2005-07-07 at 22:04, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > >> Do you implement the entire swsusp userspace interface? If not, removing
> > >> it probably isn't a reasonable plan without fair warning.
> > > 
> > > I'm not suggesting removing the sysfs interface or replacing system to
> > > ram - just the suspend to disk part.
> > 
> > Right, so you support the resume from disk trigger in sysfs and the
> > /proc/acpi/sleep interface? If suspend2 is a complete dropin replacement
> > then I'm much happier with the idea of dropping swsusp, but I don't want
> > to have to tie suspend/resume scripts to kernel versions.
> 
> I don't think that swsusp can be replaced with suspend2 right now.  First,
> swsusp works on x86-64, and the support in suspend2 is preliminary,
> AFAIK.  Second, the IA64 support for swsusp is in the works, and it is not supported
> by suspend2.
> 
> Please don't plan to drop swsusp until you are able to replace it _completely_.

Fair enough. I didn't realise Pavel had IA64 support too :>

Nigel
-- 
Evolution.
Enumerate the requirements.
Consider the interdependencies.
Calculate the probabilities.
Be amazed that people believe it happened.