lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [May]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 6)
    On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 08:47:31PM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote:

    > IMO the real fix would be on that particular poll(), changing the
    > timeout e.g. based on cpufreq notifications or even relying completely
    > on IRQs with poll(pdfs, ARRAY_SIZE(pfds), -1); Of course, this is only a
    > crude example trying to show that the real issue lies on the application
    > rather than on kernel.

    We know that this problem is mostly uninteresting if your userland is
    well written. The sad truth is that it's impossible to trust that your
    userland is well written, and broadly impossible to communicate to users
    that the reason that their battery life is miserable is because of the
    applications and not because of the platform. If you don't believe that
    that's a worthwhile use case to deal with then suspend blockers buy you
    pretty much nothing. But if you do, then nobody's yet demonstrated
    another workable way for this to be handled.

    --
    Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2010-05-17 20:01    [W:4.112 / U:0.036 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site