Re: suspend2 merge (was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: CFS and suspend2: hang in atomic copy)

Adrian Bunk
2007-04-25T20:23:31Z

On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 12:38:47PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 25 Apr 2007, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > >
> > > .. but if the alternative is a feature that just isn't worth it, and
> > > likely to not only have its own bugs, but cause bugs elsewhere? (And yes,
> > > I believe STD is both of those. There's a reason it's called "STD". Go
> > > to google and type "STD" and press "I'm feeling lucky". Google is God).
> >
> > Is there really no use case for STD?
>...
> I'd actually be happier *removing* STD support in the sense it is now:
> it's way too closely integrated with STR, even though it has absolutely
> nothing in common with it. When you STD, you'e actually much closer to a
> *shutdown* than to STR, yet the STD code continually seems to want to be
> in the "suspend" path, as shown even by its name.
>
> So my objections to STD have nothing to do with saving state and shutting
> down. They have everything to do with the fact that it is not - and will
> never be - a "suspend", and it shouldn't affect suspend.
>...

There are two completely different points:
- I say that the feature STD has use cases where STR is not a replacement
- you say you dislike the current implementation of STD

For me it was a serious regression if STD was removed without any
replacement.

If someone would replace the STD implementation with what you want it to
be I wouldn't care and you were happy.

> Linus

cu
Adrian

--

"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed