Re: [Suspend2][ 0/9] Extents support.

[Nigel Cunningham <nigel@suspend2.net>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2292 bytes --]

Hi.

On Wednesday 28 June 2006 08:19, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tuesday 27 June 2006 11:35, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > 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 let them have their existing interface for uswsusp. Still not
> > > > ideal, I agree, 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, resume= and echo disk > /sys/power/state in a way that's
> > backward compatible with swsusp and doesn't interfere with uswsusp
> > support, would you be happy? IIRC, Pavel has said in the past he wishes
> > I'd just do that, but he's not you of course.
>
> That depends on how it's done.  For sure, I wouldn't like it to be done in
> the "everything at once" manner.

I'm not sure I get what you're saying. Do you mean you'd prefer them to 
coexist for a time in mainline? If so, I'd point out that suspend2 uses 
different parameters at the moment precisely so they can coexist, so that 
wouldn't be any change.

Regards,

Nigel
-- 
See http://www.suspend2.net for Howtos, FAQs, mailing
lists, wiki and bugzilla info.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]