Re: Help needed, Re: [Bug #14334] pcmcia suspend regression from 2.6.31.1 to 2.6.31.2 - Dell Inspiron 600m

["Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw-KKrjLPT3xs0@public.gmane.org>]

On Friday 30 October 2009, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 30 Oct 2009, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > 
> > And partly exactly _because_ even Cardbus is starting to be "legacy", I'd 
> > personally prefer to try to simplify the model to the point where we don't 
> > have to think about all the subtle interactions. Just making suspend act 
> > as an eject would mean that we'd never have to worry about how the CardBus 
> > bridge interacts with the PCI layer at suspend/resume time.
> 
> Put another way: five years ago I would have felt that it could be 
> important that people can suspend and resume while they have a CD-ROM 
> mounted through a PCMCIA IDE card. Or something like that where you want 
> to keep session information.
> 
> These days, that scenario is less interesting to begin with, and we're 
> generally better at some of the hotplug issues anyway. Example: one of the 
> reasons I used to like not causing an unplug event was because I had 
> network cards, and hated setting up the connection again. These days, all 
> distros come with networkmanager or similar, and hotplug networking just 
> works (even if the "CD-ROM mounted" case probably still would cause 
> problems).
> 
> So I think we used to have good reasons to try to maintain state over a 
> suspend event, but many of those reasons have become weaker, while at the 
> same time USB has meant that PCMCIA itself has become more of a 
> "maintenance burden" rather than a "primary subsystem".

I agree.

Rafael