Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 27 May 2010 19:27:40 +0300 | From | Felipe Balbi <> | Subject | Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8) |
| |
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 05:06:23PM +0200, ext Alan Stern wrote: >If people don't mind, here is a greatly simplified summary of the >comments and objections I have seen so far on this thread: > > The in-kernel suspend blocker implementation is okay, even > beneficial.
I disagree here. I believe expressing that as QoS is much better. Let the kernel decide which power state is better as long as I can say I need 100us IRQ latency or 100ms wakeup latency.
-- balbi
DefectiveByDesign.org
| |