To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
From: torvalds@transmeta.com (Linus Torvalds)
Subject: Re: swsusp: don't eat ide disks
Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2002 19:39:22 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: Transmeta Corporation
Message-ID: <aq19la$2od$1@penguin.transmeta.com>
References: <20021102184735.GA179@elf.ucw.cz>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 2 Nov 2002 19:39:48 GMT
Cache-Post-Path: palladium.transmeta.com!unknown@penguin.transmeta.com
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1125
Lines: 28

In article <20021102184735.GA179@elf.ucw.cz>,
Pavel Machek  <pavel@ucw.cz> wrote:
>
>Here's patch to prevent random scribling over disks during
>suspend... In the meantime alan killed (unreferenced at that time)
>idedisk_suspend() and idedisk_release(), so I have to reintroduce
>them.

I _still_ haven't gotten an explanation for the difference between the
do_xxx_suspend and xxxx_suspend, and why we have both.

> Should I go ahead and kill do_idedisk_suspend and related code?

Please.  Along with an explanation of what the differences are, and who
cares, and who calls which, and why having two different versions aren't
needed any more (or if they _are_ needed, explain that). Right now I'm
not applying this patch just because I want an explanation of it (like I
did last time).

The two different cases are just too confusing, I want to be unconfused. 

		Thanks,
			Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/