Hi. On Sunday 09 July 2006 22:15, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Sat, Jul 08, 2006 at 09:25:12PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > Now there seem to be two possible ways to go: > > 1) Drop the implementation that already is in the kernel and replace it > > with the out-of-the-tree one. > > This would break existing interfaces to some extent, right? suspend2 > doesn't have the same set of tunables. I'm not sure whether this is > something we especially care about, but it would potentially break some > existing userland code. I don't want to go this way immediately, but if we did, it doesn't need to mean breakage for userland. Suspend2 could replace the tunables that swsusp uses, so it could be a transparent replacement for swsusp, assuming that the filewriter was turned off by default. (I say this because if the filewriter and swapwriter are both compiled in, the format for resume2 is resume2=[swap|file]:/dev/<whatever><:offset> But with only the swapwriter or only the filewriter, the "swap" or "file" is optional. Regards, Nigel -- Nigel, Michelle and Alisdair Cunningham 5 Mitchell Street Cobden 3266 Victoria, Australia
Attachment:
pgptmff8v73S4.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- References:
- Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: uswsusp history lesson
- From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[email protected]>
- Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: uswsusp history lesson
- From: Matthew Garrett <[email protected]>
- Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: uswsusp history lesson
- Prev by Date: Re: 2.6.18-rc1-mm1 fails on amd64 (smp_call_function_single)
- Next by Date: Re: LibPATA code issues / 2.6.15.4 (found the opcode=0x35)!
- Previous by thread: Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: uswsusp history lesson
- Next by thread: Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: uswsusp history lesson
- Index(es):
 |