From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263009AbUCLWr2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Mar 2004 17:47:28 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263010AbUCLWr2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Mar 2004 17:47:28 -0500 Received: from gprs40-129.eurotel.cz ([160.218.40.129]:23170 "EHLO amd.ucw.cz") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263009AbUCLWr1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Mar 2004 17:47:27 -0500 Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 23:46:45 +0100 From: Pavel Machek To: Andrew Morton , torvalds@transmeta.com, kernel list Subject: Dealing with swsusp vs. pmdisk Message-ID: <20040312224645.GA326@elf.ucw.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-Warning: Reading this can be dangerous to your mental health. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi! I don't really like having two implementations of same code in kernel. There are two ways to deal with it: * remove pmdisk from kernel + its easy * remove swsusp from kernel, rename pmdisk to swsusp, fix all bugs that were fixed in swsusp but not in pmdisk + people seem to like pmdisk code more - will need some testing in -mm series Which one do you prefer? I can do both... Pavel -- When do you have a heart between your knees? [Johanka's followup: and *two* hearts?]