On 6/27/06, Nigel Cunningham <[email protected]> wrote:
Suspend2 is a
reimplementation of swsusp, not a series of incremental modifications. It
uses completely different methods for writing the image, storing the metadata
and so on. Until recently, the only thing it shared with swsusp was the
refrigerator and driver model calls, and even now the sharing of lowlevel
code is only a tiny fraction of all that is done.
This is something I don't understand. Why can you not submit patches
that simply do things like "change method for writing image" and
reduce the difference between suspend2 and mainline? It may be more
work, but I think you will find that incremental changes are a lot
easier for people to review and merge.
Right now, it seems like Linus and Andrew have only two choices:
1. Ignore your submission
2. Merge all of suspend2
We have had complete reworks of entire subsystems in the 2.6 series
without problems, simply because the effort was taken to make the
changes incrementally.
Could I ask what might be a dumb question in this regard - why isn't Reiser4
going through the same process?
reiser4 has been in -mm for quite a while without being merged into
mainline. I don't think you want the same fate for suspend2.
Finally, I just want to say I appreciate all the effort you (and Pavel
and Rafael) are putting into suspend-to-disk. It is critical
functionality for me and I think we can get both a well functioning
and maintainable implementation.
Thanks,
Rahul
--
Rahul Karnik
[email protected]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
