From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8) Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 23:10:50 +0200 Message-ID: <201005272310.50724.rjw@sisk.pl> References: <1274981533.27810.5624.camel@twins> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1274981533.27810.5624.camel@twins> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Alan Stern , Felipe Balbi , Thomas Gleixner , Arve =?utf-8?q?Hj=C3=B8nnev=C3=A5g?= , LKML , Florian Mickler , Linux OMAP Mailing List , Linux PM , Alan Cox List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 27 May 2010, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, 2010-05-27 at 13:29 -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > > > > They may be different conceptually. Nevertheless, Android uses forced > > suspend as a form of power saving. Until better mechanisms are in > > place, it makes sense. > > So let them, doesn't mean we have to merge it. Or will you saw your foot > off too if google were to promotes it? Do you have to be offensive to people who disagree with you? Alan simply wants to understand the _technical_ objections that people have to this patchset and you're not helping. So, could you please explain what exactly is your technical objection to it? Rafael