[lkml]   [2006]   [Jun]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
Subjectswsusp / suspend2 reliability (was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: Suspend2 - Request for review & inclusion in -mm)

> > 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.

(cesky, pictures)
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2006-06-28 00:26    [W:0.167 / U:0.240 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site