Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 9 Feb 2007 21:22:48 -0500 | From | "Lee Revell" <> | Subject | Re: NAK new drivers without proper power management? |
| |
On 2/9/07, Nigel Cunningham <nigel@nigel.suspend2.net> wrote: > On Fri, 2007-02-09 at 20:59 -0500, Lee Revell wrote: > > On 2/9/07, Robert Hancock <hancockr@shaw.ca> wrote: > > > I would disagree that it's a peripheral issue, it's pretty core these > > > days, at least for any hardware that you can stuff in a laptop (though a > > > fair number of desktops get suspended and resumed these days too). > > > > Servers are still the most important Linux market, and don't care > > about suspend/resume. I would consider implementing suspend./resume > > for a driver that will only be used in server or HPC class hardware a > > waste of valuable development resources. > > Not necessarily. Imagine suspending to disk in order to replace a faulty > card. That could be way faster and less disruptive than shutting down > normally and loosing caches and so on. >
Hmm. If uptime is critical I would make sure to have redundant systems anyway and I would just reboot the thing. I would not expect the suspend/resume paths on server class hardware like 10gig ethernet, Infiniband adapters, or high end SCSI to be particularly well tested.
> Irrespective of the above, servers tend not to have too much in the way > of hardware unique to them anyway, and even if you don't find it useful, > that's not to say others won't want it.
Yes but for such hardware, suspend/resume is likely to be a lot of work to implement, and I'd rather the developers devote those resources to making the driver as stable and performant as possible.
I agree 100% that drivers for desktop and laptop hardware should be rejected if missing suspend/resume.
Lee - 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/
| |