Re: [PATCH encrypted swsusp 1/3] core functionality

["Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>]

Hi,

On Monday, 11 of April 2005 23:08, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
]--snip--[
> > > @@ -130,6 +150,52 @@
> > >  static unsigned short swapfile_used[MAX_SWAPFILES];
> > >  static unsigned short root_swap;
> > >  
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_SWSUSP_ENCRYPT
> > > +static struct crypto_tfm *crypto_init(int mode)
> > 
> > I think it's better if this function returns an int error code and the
> > messages are printed where it's called from.  This way, the essential
> > part of the code would be easier to grasp (Pavel?).
> 
> Agreed. Actually I do not care where messages are printed, but
> returning different code for different errors seems right.

Hm.  You probably don't want suspend-related messages to be printed during
resume (this function is called in two different places)? :-)

Rafael


-- 
- Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?
- That depends a good deal on where you want to get to.
		-- Lewis Carroll "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland"