lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Feb]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: 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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2006-02-07 01:48    [W:0.023 / U:0.360 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site