lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [May]   [26]   [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 8)
    On Wed, 26 May 2010 15:35:32 +0300
    Felipe Balbi <felipe.balbi@nokia.com> wrote:

    > Hi,
    >
    > On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 02:33:23PM +0200, ext Florian Mickler wrote:
    > >But then someone at the user side has to know what he is doing.
    > >
    > >I fear, if you target mass market without central distribution
    > >channels, you can not assume that much.
    >
    > and that's enough to push hacks into the kernel ? I don't think so. Do
    > it like apple and prevent multi-tasking for any non-apple applications
    > :-p
    >
    :)

    It really comes down to a policy decision by the distribution maker.
    And I don't think kernel upstream should be the one to force one way or
    the other. So merging this patch set will allow android to continue
    their work _on mainline_ while everybody else can continue as before.

    All points about the impact on the kernel have already been raised. So
    you should be happy there.

    Nonetheless, I really think the kernel needs to allow for the android
    way of power saving. It misses out on a big feature and a big user-base
    if not.

    Also I expect there to be synergies between android development and
    mainline kernel development _only_ if android development can use
    mainline kernel.

    And as for the quality of the "hack": I think you find this ugly, just
    because you don't like the concept of degrading user space guaranties on
    timers and stuff.

    But look at it this way: Suspend blockers are a way for the kernel
    to make user space programs accountable for using the resource "power".
    If a user space program needs the "traditional" guaranties for
    functioning properly, it needs to take a suspend blocker. But _THEN_ it
    better be well behaved. This is a kind of contract between userspace
    and kernelspace.

    On the other hand, if I don't need these traditional guaranties on
    timers and stuff, I don't have to know device specific things about
    power consumption. I can just use whatever facilities the programming
    language provides without needing to worry about low level details.

    This is a _big_ plus for attracting 3rd party programs. (And of course
    the thing you don't like).

    Cheers,
    Flo






    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2010-05-26 14:57    [W:6.767 / U:0.596 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site