Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 6)

From: Rafael J. Wysocki
Date: Thu May 13 2010 - 17:10:48 EST


On Thursday 13 May 2010, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 12:36:34PM -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > On Thu, 2010-05-13 at 20:11 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > See feature-removal-schedule.txt. So far we have no indication that it's
> > > going to be replaced, because nobody has actually suggested a working
> > > way to do this better. If we had a concrete implementation proposal for
> > > that then we'd be in a pretty different position right now.
> >
> > Ok, feature-removal-schedule.txt applies to everything tho. What your
> > saying is that if this interface only last a short time it might take 6
> > months, if it last for a long time it would take longer. There's no easy
> > way to know that Google is the only user after some amount of time
> > passes.
>
> If the interface is there for a long time, it's because we haven't come
> up with anything better. And if we haven't come up with anything better,
> the interface deserves to be there.

Moreover, the interface is already in use out-of-tree and that usage is
actually _growing_, so we have a growing number of out-of-tree drivers that
aren't megrgeable for this very reason.

I don't see any _realistic_ way of solving this problem other than merging
the opportunistic suspend. If anyone sees one, and I mean _realistic_ and
_practically_ _feasible_, please tell me.

Rafael
--
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/