On Mon, Jun 07, 2010 at 12:26:55AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > That takes a lot of the bullshit arguments about downstream users > being hurt out of the discussion. The above problems are way more > complex to resolve than the suspend blocker details. > > That's another prove why we can let the drivers flow in (in the worst > case w/o the suspend blocker stubs) and have no pressure to resolve > the suspend blocker problem yesterday. > > That said, after thinking more about it, I'm advocating the stubs > solution with a clear removal / decision date constraint > (e.g. 2.6.37), as it forces all involved parties to stay tuned and not > to forget about it. I'm curious about the outcome :) As long as we have that clear removal schedule I'm fine with in-kernel suspend blocker stubs. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
