Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 7 Feb 2006 01:46:11 +0100 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.) |
| |
On Po 06-02-06 19:37:13, Jim Crilly wrote: > On 02/07/06 12:51:40AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > Hi, > > > > This point is valid, but I don't think the users will _have_ _to_ switch to the > > userland suspend. AFAICT we are going to keep the kernel-based code > > as long as necessary. > > > > We are just going to implement features in the user space that need not be > > implemented in the kernel. Of course they can be implemented in the > > kernel, and you have shown that clearly, but since they need not be there, > > we should at least try to implement them in the user space and see how this > > works. > > > > Frankly, I have no strong opinion on whether they _should_ be implemented > > in the user space or in the kernel, but I think we won't know that until > > we actually _try_. > > > > Some of the stuff belongs in userspace without a doubt, like the UI. But > why was the cryptoapi stuff added to the kernel if everytime someone goes > to use it people yell "That's too much complexity, do it in userspace!"?
For stuff that can't be reasonably done in userspace, like encrypted loop. And notice that cryptoapi does *not* yet contain LZW. Pavel
-- Web maintainer for suspend.sf.net (www.sf.net/projects/suspend) wanted... - 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/
| |