From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754284AbXDYVbr (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Apr 2007 17:31:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754247AbXDYVb0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Apr 2007 17:31:26 -0400 Received: from [212.12.190.171] ([212.12.190.171]:33143 "EHLO raad.intranet" rhost-flags-FAIL-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754276AbXDYVbY (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Apr 2007 17:31:24 -0400 From: Al Boldi To: Pavel Machek , William Heimbigner Subject: Re: Reasons to merge suspend2. Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 00:33:22 +0300 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 Cc: "John Anthony Kazos Jr." , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <200704251551.38373.a1426z@gawab.com> <20070425161656.GA17253@elf.ucw.cz> In-Reply-To: <20070425161656.GA17253@elf.ucw.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200704260033.22378.a1426z@gawab.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! Hi! > > >>I didn't read your whole post, it's way too long, but I would like to > > >> see your patch in mainline as an option to swsusp. What would make > > >> this infeasible? > > > > > >For one thing, Linus said not but yesterday that he doesn't want > > > multiple competing suspend algorithms like this in the kernel at once. > > > (If I parsed his message correctly, he doesn't want any in the kernel, > > > but he's putting up with it because it seems somewhat needed.) > > > > Would it be a feasible solution to have a very minimal and generic > > software suspend in the kernel, and then various userspace > > implementations could take care of this? > > Yes please. If you want suspend-over-nfs or whatever, just add it to > the userspace; we have enough support in kernel now. The only way I can think of supporting this, would probably be via an initramfs trick. But, if you think suspend-over-nfs is possible from user-space, then why should there be any need for swsusp in the kernel? Thanks! -- Al