On Sat, 2006-02-04 at 01:53 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> No, it would not. Merging suspend2 now would mean usable suspend
> support for you in 3 or so months, but would push uswsusp forward year
> or more.
>From my perspective, uswsusp is pie in the sky. I don't care if it gets
pushed back or not.
On the other hand suspend2 works - NOW. And it ain't just me. Do you
really think all these folks that are using suspend2 have an urge to
patch their notebook kernels just because they feel like it?
But hey, you seem to be bent on not having it - and you seem to be the
one making that calls, so the rest of us that just want to use the
notebooks properly will have to patch until someone decides that having
something that works is more important than being right all the time.
It's OK, have it your way.
--
Bojan
This was personal email. It is pretty rude to post it to public lists.
> But hey, you seem to be bent on not having it - and you seem to be the
> one making that calls, so the rest of us that just want to use the
> notebooks properly will have to patch until someone decides that having
> something that works is more important than being right all the
> time.
In the end, it is important what is right, not what works. If you do
not understand that -- bad for you.
Pavel
--
Thanks, Sharp!
Hi.
On Saturday 04 February 2006 18:53, Pavel Machek wrote:
> This was personal email. It is pretty rude to post it to public lists.
>
> > But hey, you seem to be bent on not having it - and you seem to be the
> > one making that calls, so the rest of us that just want to use the
> > notebooks properly will have to patch until someone decides that
> > having something that works is more important than being right all the
> > time.
>
> In the end, it is important what is right, not what works. If you do
> not understand that -- bad for you.
True, but in something like putting code in the kernel vs in userspace,
people apply different criteria in determining what is right. God hasn't
written "You shall do suspend to disk in userspace" (and we'd probably
rebel against Him anyway if He did :>), so we have to figure out what the
best way is. Is userspace the 'right' solution? Well, yes, it does let you
add features without adding to kernel code. But it also creates other
problems. Putting it in kernel space has issues too - some things like
userui are best left where they won't necessary take down the whole
process if they don't work right. Personally, I think we're getting too
polarised here. I've already accepted that there's a space for userspace
code by merging (into Suspend2) code that puts the user interface there,
along with management of storage. You agree that somethings, such as the
atomic copy, simply can't be done in userspace. Without having looked
seriously at the code yet, I'd be pretty sure that you're also leaving the
calculation of what pages to store in the kernel. That just leaves how to
store the image. Aren't we actually a lot closer than it has appeared?
Nigel
Pavel Machek <[email protected]> writes:
> In the end, it is important what is right, not what works. If you do
> not understand that -- bad for you.
It what is right doesn't work, it's not much use, is it?
--
Hilsen Harald.
On Sat, 2006-02-04 at 09:53 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> In the end, it is important what is right, not what works. If you do
> not understand that -- bad for you.
Uh, oh, I'm finally getting it now... People buy notebooks to use them
as doorstops. And, the important things is to be right - yep, it's all
coming together now :-)
--
Bojan
On Sat, 2006-02-04 at 14:59 +0100, Harald Arnesen wrote:
> It what is right doesn't work, it's not much use, is it?
Of course it is. Your *notebook* isn't of much use, but you can post on
various lists claiming that you're right, which then compensates for
your notebook not working. Life is a serious of trade-offs, isn't
it? ;-)
--
Bojan
Hi!
> > This was personal email. It is pretty rude to post it to public lists.
> >
> > > But hey, you seem to be bent on not having it - and you seem to be the
> > > one making that calls, so the rest of us that just want to use the
> > > notebooks properly will have to patch until someone decides that
> > > having something that works is more important than being right all the
> > > time.
> >
> > In the end, it is important what is right, not what works. If you do
> > not understand that -- bad for you.
>
> True, but in something like putting code in the kernel vs in userspace,
> people apply different criteria in determining what is right. God hasn't
> written "You shall do suspend to disk in userspace" (and we'd probably
Would written notice from Linus be good enough? :-))))
> best way is. Is userspace the 'right' solution? Well, yes, it does let you
> add features without adding to kernel code. But it also creates other
> problems. Putting it in kernel space has issues too - some things like
> userui are best left where they won't necessary take down the whole
> process if they don't work right. Personally, I think we're getting too
> polarised here. I've already accepted that there's a space for userspace
> code by merging (into Suspend2) code that puts the user interface there,
> along with management of storage. You agree that somethings, such as
> the
I did not know about storage management.
> atomic copy, simply can't be done in userspace. Without having looked
> seriously at the code yet, I'd be pretty sure that you're also leaving the
> calculation of what pages to store in the kernel. That just leaves how to
> store the image. Aren't we actually a lot closer than it has appeared?
Well, perhaps we are. It should be possible to move suspend2 into
userspace, and at that point we can share all the kernel-level code
(and probably all the user-level code, too :-).
Pavel
--
Thanks, Sharp!