Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 28 Jun 2006 00:22:34 +0200 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | swsusp / suspend2 reliability (was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: Suspend2 - Request for review & inclusion in -mm) |
| |
Hi!
> > uswsusp is a great idea, really.. I love it.. but suspend2 is here, it > > works, it's stable and it's now. Why continue to deprive the mainstream of > > these features because "uswsusp should".. as yet it doesn't.. and when it > > does then we can phase out the currently stable, working alternative that > > has all these features that uswsusp _will_ have, after it's had them for a > > year or so and its been proven stable. Not only that, I'll be happy to > > migrate over to it. Until then however, you can pry suspend2.. cold, > > dead.. blah blah.. > > Given the above explanation, it's obvious that I'm an outside watcher now, > but if swsusp2 success rate is clearly higher than the standard version, > then I'd also strongly advocate this direction since, quite frankly,
I do not think suspend2 works on more machines than in-kernel swsusp. Problems are in drivers, and drivers are shared.
That means that if you have machine where suspend2 works and swsusp does not, please tell me. I do not think there are many of them.
Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html - 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/
| |