From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932391AbWGGXdQ (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Jul 2006 19:33:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932403AbWGGXdQ (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Jul 2006 19:33:16 -0400 Received: from pop5-1.us4.outblaze.com ([205.158.62.125]:43729 "HELO pop5-1.us4.outblaze.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S932391AbWGGXdP (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Jul 2006 19:33:15 -0400 From: Nigel Cunningham To: suspend2-devel@lists.suspend2.net Subject: Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: swsusp / suspend2 reliability Date: Sat, 8 Jul 2006 09:33:00 +1000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 Cc: Pavel Machek , Olivier Galibert , grundig , Avuton Olrich , jan@rychter.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20060627133321.GB3019@elf.ucw.cz> <20060707215656.GA30353@dspnet.fr.eu.org> <20060707232523.GC1746@elf.ucw.cz> In-Reply-To: <20060707232523.GC1746@elf.ucw.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart2124904.DLCZC8f5pq"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200607080933.12372.ncunningham@linuxmail.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --nextPart2124904.DLCZC8f5pq Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Hi. On Saturday 08 July 2006 09:25, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > So what Pavel wants can be > > > translated as 'please use already merged code, it can already do what > > > you want without further changing kernel'. > > > > Like we'd want to use unreviewed, extremely new and risky code for > > something that happily destroy filesystems. > > You can either use suspend2 (14000 lines of unreviewed kernel code, > old) or uswsusp (~500 lines of reviewed kernel code, ~2000 lines of > unreviewed userspace code, new). I was going to keep quiet, but I have to say this: If Suspend2 can rightly = be=20 called unreviewed code, it's only because you've been too busy flaming etc = to=20 give it serious review. Personally, though, I don't think it's right to cal= l=20 it unreviewed. I've had and applied feedback from lots of people over time= =20 (hch, Rafael, Pekka(sp?), Nick, Con and Hugh to name just a few). If they=20 weren't reviewing the code, what were they doing? Regards, Nigel =2D-=20 Nigel, Michelle and Alisdair Cunningham 5 Mitchell Street Cobden 3266 Victoria, Australia --nextPart2124904.DLCZC8f5pq Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBEru84N0y+n1M3mo0RAuHyAKD0vNk6+td8kXBRrv5RpJnVtyatJwCfUREz hIoc4vBRA0cVjdeQ4B9Lz38= =szMZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart2124904.DLCZC8f5pq--