Re: pm: Revert swsusp to 2.6.0-test3

[Patrick Mochel]

> > Ok. In that case, can we remove the '#if 0' blocks entirely, or at least 
> > add a big comment on why they are there but disabled?
> 
> Like this?

Pavel, I don't even know where to begin, but I will suggest that you check 
your sources better. I did apply the patch to revert swsusp to the state 
it was in -test3. According to bitkeeper, it's ChangeSet 1.1217.3.31, 
which can be viewed here: 

http://linus.bkbits.net:8080/linux-2.5/patch@xxxxxxxxxxx

It was merged last Thursday night, which means it should have been in 
-test5-bk13. The changelog also appeared on the bk-commits-head list. 


Next, if you're going to patch my code, do *not* do crap like this: 

> +#if 0 
> +     /* Patrick is likely to s/swsusp_/pmdisk_/ in next release,
> +        but #if 0 is needed so that this compiles. */
>       if ((error = swsusp_save()))
>               goto Done;
> 
> @@ -195,6 +198,7 @@
>       } else
>               pr_debug("PM: Image restored successfully.\n");
>       swsusp_free();
> +#endif

I asked you several weeks ago to submit a patch that simply removed the
calls to swsusp. You did not, and you choose here to simply break it, and
add a bullshit comment to it.  

If you're going to 'fix' the code, take a minute to submit a patch that
does not add #ifdef's, and with a comment that actually makes sense to
someone other than you.

And, if you're going to submit a patch, please do so against the current 
release. 


	Pat

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