From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932876AbWF0JfS (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Jun 2006 05:35:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933385AbWF0JfS (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Jun 2006 05:35:18 -0400 Received: from pop5-1.us4.outblaze.com ([205.158.62.125]:55505 "HELO pop5-1.us4.outblaze.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S932876AbWF0JfQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Jun 2006 05:35:16 -0400 From: Nigel Cunningham Reply-To: nigel@suspend2.net To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: [Suspend2][ 0/9] Extents support. Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 19:35:07 +1000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 Cc: Jens Axboe , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20060626165404.11065.91833.stgit@nigel.suspend2.net> <200606271907.27831.nigel@suspend2.net> <200606271126.28898.rjw@sisk.pl> In-Reply-To: <200606271126.28898.rjw@sisk.pl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart9082126.FV47xy7HuM"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200606271935.13261.nigel@suspend2.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --nextPart9082126.FV47xy7HuM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Hi. On Tuesday 27 June 2006 19:26, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > Now I haven't followed the suspend2 vs swsusp debate very closely, but > > > it seems to me that your biggest problem with getting this merged is > > > getting consensus on where exactly this is going. Nobody wants two > > > different suspend modules in the kernel. So there are two options - > > > suspend2 is deemed the way to go, and it gets merged and replaces > > > swsusp. Or the other way around - people like swsusp more, and you are > > > doomed to maintain suspend2 outside the tree. > > > > Generally, I agree, although my understanding of Rafael and Pavel's > > mindset is that swsusp is a dead dog and uswsusp is the way they want to > > see things go. swsusp is only staying for backwards compatability. If > > that's the case, perhaps we can just replace swsusp with Suspend2 and l= et > > them have their existing interface for uswsusp. Still not ideal, I agre= e, > > but it would be progress. > > Well, ususpend needs some core functionality to be provided by the kernel, > like freezing/thawing processes (this is also used by the STR), > snapshotting the system memory. These should be shared with the in-kernel > suspend, be it swsusp or suspend2. If I modify suspend2 so that from now on it replaces swsusp, using noresume= ,=20 resume=3D and echo disk > /sys/power/state in a way that's backward compati= ble=20 with swsusp and doesn't interfere with uswsusp support, would you be happy?= =20 IIRC, Pavel has said in the past he wishes I'd just do that, but he's not y= ou=20 of course. Regards, Nigel =2D-=20 See http://www.suspend2.net for Howtos, FAQs, mailing lists, wiki and bugzilla info. --nextPart9082126.FV47xy7HuM Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBEoPvRN0y+n1M3mo0RAsUGAKCSDjNOYevXaHVjSzmrKHmzJiUm8ACgyIon EicdGrOy4CnzPl9PTkhUedY= =iWBy -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart9082126.FV47xy7HuM--