Suspend2 isn't invasive.

[Ben Collins]

On Thu, 2006-11-30 at 17:15 +1100, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> Hi.
> 
> Sorry for not continuing the existing thread, but I've only just
> subscribed, after seeing Ben's assertion.
> 
> Suspend2 isn't normally an invasive patch. At the moment it's a little
> more invasive because I'm carrying the addition of linux/freezer.h that
> will go into Linus' tree shortly, so let me prove a diffstat from 2.2.8.

Your definition of invasive and mine are two different things.

Mine includes things like integrating fixes from your code into a tree
that has an existing suspend2 patch applied. So incremental patching is
required, and this increases the amount of merging I have to do (even if
it's not a conflict, it creates merges when I sync with Linus).

My statement wasn't a stab at suspend2, as much as it was a declaration
about our development criteria. The major point being that I like to
keep changes to stock kernel code to a bare minimum, unless it is
required. Since suspend2 cannot meet this criteria, and it's benefit
does not outweigh that, I wont include it.