On Sat, 2007-04-28 at 22:01 +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:

I would very much rather that we keep the existing code path intact
and add the code to suspend via /sys/power/state as a separate code
path. 

Are you serious? The only thing the generic code does here is invoke our
stuff in the right order. That shouldn't be too much of a constraint. We
don't even have multiple CPUs or anything that was recently giving
problems.

I am not confident enough about the state of the generic
suspend/resume code to commit to using it as the only way to suspend
to RAM, given how many bugs it seems to have (as evidenced by the
number of suspend-related bugs in Adrian Bunk's regression lists, for
instance).

Of the suspend related bugs Adrian's regression list most aren't really
related to the generic code we rely on, especially since all machines
this code applies to are single-CPU. Besides, relying on it is the only
way to ensure it stays compatible.

johannes