Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8)

Florian Mickler
2010-05-26T15:49:40Z

On Wed, 26 May 2010 17:47:35 +0200
Florian Mickler <florian@mickler.org> wrote:

> On Wed, 26 May 2010 17:45:00 +0200
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 2010-05-26 at 17:40 +0200, Florian Mickler wrote:
> > > On Wed, 26 May 2010 17:15:47 +0200
> > > Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Wed, 2010-05-26 at 17:11 +0200, Florian Mickler wrote:
> > > > > I'm not saying that your argument is not valid. But why don't you look
> > > > > at suspend blockers as a contract between userspace and kernelspace? An
> > > > > Opt-In to the current guarantees the kernel provides in the non-suspend
> > > > > case.
> > > >
> > > > That's backwards.
> > >
> > > I think that's the point of it.
> >
> > Apparently, and you're not accepting that we're telling you we think its
> > a singularly bad idea. Alan seems to have the skill to clearly explain
> > why, I suggest you re-read his emails again.
>
> I'm sorry if I offend you. I indeed read Alan's emails. It's just they
> have more content than yours. So it takes longer.
>
> Cheers,
> Flo

p.s.: also they encourage me to think more before answering.