Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 18 Feb 2008 14:09:14 +0100 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [patch] suspend/resume self-test |
| |
* David Brownell <david-b@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > > - Includes a command line parameter, which needs work yet ... it > > > currently turns this test off, but it should also let the target > > > state be specified (and maybe even default to "no test"). > > I think "no test" should be the default; STR working sanely on x86 is > unfortunately too much a surprise. Someone more active in PM testing > should update that.
All i'm asking for is to make the self-test easily accessible. Not for it to blow up in the face of users who do not ask for it.
And, at least to me, there seems to be a rather apparent correlation between "suspend/resume regressions caught as early as possible" and the future, desired state of: "STR working sanely on x86" ;-)
You really seem to treat S2R suckiness as a fact of life, but it isnt. Yes, it's a hard field for a number of reasons, but we could be doing _a lot_ better. One of them would be this "notice s2r breakage when i create or add the patch that breaks it" angle.
Ingo
-- 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/
| |