From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933046Ab0E0FLL (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 May 2010 01:11:11 -0400 Received: from ist.d-labs.de ([213.239.218.44]:60507 "EHLO mx01.d-labs.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932367Ab0E0FLI (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 May 2010 01:11:08 -0400 Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 07:11:00 +0200 From: Florian Mickler To: Vitaly Wool Cc: Alan Cox , Thomas Gleixner , Peter Zijlstra , LKML , felipe.balbi@nokia.com, Linux OMAP Mailing List , Linux PM Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8) Message-ID: <20100527071100.3a38bbac@schatten.dmk.lab> In-Reply-To: References: <20100526171106.0e44a736@schatten.dmk.lab> <20100526190204.5efe4d59@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20100526215606.2a747c61@schatten.dmk.lab> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.5 (GTK+ 2.18.9; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 26 May 2010 22:03:37 +0200 Vitaly Wool wrote: > On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 9:56 PM, Florian Mickler wrote: > > > Your approach definitely sounds better than the current solution. > > What about mapping suspend blocker functionality later on, when this > > interface exists, on to this new approach and deprecating it? > > What about coming back after some while with the appropriate solution > when it's ready instead of stubbornly pushing crap? > > ~Vitaly Because quite frankly, for a good part of linux users, suspend blockers is already in the kernel. It's just an historical mistake that they are not in the linux kernel's hosted on kernel.org. So why don't we do what we always do? Improve existing interfaces step by step? Top Down approaches fail from time to time. Also it is not clear, that that proposed interface works for the use cases. This has to be proven by providing an implementation. Cheers, Flo