Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 3 Oct 2011 09:32:26 +0100 | From | Alan Cox <> | Subject | Re: [: Re: [RFC] wake up notifications and suspend blocking (aka more wakelock stuff)] |
| |
On Sun, 2 Oct 2011 09:48:49 -0700 mark gross <markgross@thegnar.org> wrote:
> Forwarding to bigger group for discussion.
Looks clean enough - only question I have is do we need a separate 'suspend block' or can latency do it -suspend is a very very high latency event. I guess the suspend block is clearer in intent than abusing latency but I do wonder if the actual suspend path should also check latency constraints too. If I've asked for 5mS latency then suspend is a wrong choice!
Alan
| |