[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTikp1Z9mGOaLf_oE_3qCL7U4oeHaPSp6zkp4eEfL@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2010 22:56:45 +0300
From: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@...il.com>
To: Florian Mickler <florian@...kler.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...e.de>,
Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>,
tytso@....edu, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Linux OMAP Mailing List <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
felipe.balbi@...ia.com, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8)
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 10:49 PM, Florian Mickler <florian@...kler.org> wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 20:16:33 +0300
> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@...il.com> wrote:
>> New users will see it has low score; they will not install it. That's
>> a network effect.
>>
>> Having users is the quintessential reason people write code.
>
> That is nice. But how does it impact the problem that suspend blockers
> solve? And why do suspend blockers interfere with that?
It doesn't, I don't know why people keep bringing this argument, I
just though it should not be left open as a valid one.
I should have mentioned that this is indeed irrelevant.
--
Felipe Contreras
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists