From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932204AbWF2F6t (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Jun 2006 01:58:49 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751609AbWF2F6t (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Jun 2006 01:58:49 -0400 Received: from pop5-1.us4.outblaze.com ([205.158.62.125]:60295 "HELO pop5-1.us4.outblaze.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751582AbWF2F6s (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Jun 2006 01:58:48 -0400 From: Nigel Cunningham Reply-To: nigel@suspend2.net To: "Pekka Enberg" Subject: Re: [Suspend2][ 0/9] Extents support. Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 15:44:14 +1000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 Cc: "Rahul Karnik" , "Jens Axboe" , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20060626165404.11065.91833.stgit@nigel.suspend2.net> <200606290937.31174.nigel@suspend2.net> <84144f020606282219n269fffe2i27bdd789758cc268@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <84144f020606282219n269fffe2i27bdd789758cc268@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1684670.7iPNciId43"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200606291544.18392.nigel@suspend2.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --nextPart1684670.7iPNciId43 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Hi. On Thursday 29 June 2006 15:19, Pekka Enberg wrote: > On 6/29/06, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > Sure, I know where I'd be headed, but it would be a huge waste of time > > and effort. > > Perhaps to you Nigel. For the rest of us reviewing your patches, it's > much better. I suspect it would be better for the users down the road > as well. I don't know if you realize it, but what you're doing now > is, "here's a big chunck of code, take it or leave it". And at least > historically people have had hard time doing getting stuff merged like > that. I did try really hard not to do that (big chunk of code, take it or leave i= t).=20 That's why it's split up into so many little patches. The problem seems to = be=20 that it's not split up in the way some people wanted, rather than not split= =20 up at all. I want to make it easier on you guys, but it just seems to me li= ke=20 regardless of what I do, it's not the right thing. I can understand wanting small changes to swsusp to transform it into=20 suspend2, but I also understand that I've spent approximately 5 years of=20 developing from the point Pavel forked the code base until today, and part = of=20 that has been two complete reworkings of the way in which the data is store= d=20 and the thing operates - irreducible complexity that just doesn't fit into= =20 the incremental change model. So I'm trying to do what seems to me to be th= e=20 next best thing. Having arranged functions that deal with particular parts = of=20 the system into individual files, I've broken the files up into logical par= ts=20 and submitted them in groups. If we consider the more primitive parts first= ,=20 then move to the increasingly abstract operations (or vice versa), I think= =20 we'll have a good approach with what's already done. Regards, Nigel =2D-=20 See http://www.suspend2.net for Howtos, FAQs, mailing lists, wiki and bugzilla info. --nextPart1684670.7iPNciId43 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBEo2iyN0y+n1M3mo0RAhqhAKDMKitN3V6ovlIT/DPb35bQK4OQiQCg8vKr HrVaGAIhYP31T3jkm78qDT8= =XmhF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1684670.7iPNciId43--