lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jun]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [linux-pm] suspend blockers & Android integration
On Fri, 11 Jun 2010, James Bottomley wrote:

> On Thu, 2010-06-10 at 21:21 -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> > Do we at least have a clean way that a driver can
> > reject a system suspend? I've lost track of many
> > issues, but maybe this could be phrased as a QOS
> > constraint: the current config of driver X needs
> > clock Y active to enter the target system suspend
> > state, driver's suspend() method reports as much. Then the entry to
> > that system state gets blocked
> > if the clock isn't enabled.
>
> So in QoS modifications to android patches, the answer is "yes" ...
> except that the current android patch set didn't actually have this type
> of wakelock in it.
>
> Android wants an idleness suspend block (or pm qos constraint) that a
> driver can set to prevent the system idleness power govenor from
> dropping into a power state too low for the driver, so in USB terms this
> would prevent the states that shut down the clock. For android, it
> prevented shutdown of an internal i2c bus.
>
> The one thing that does look difficult is that these power constraints
> are device (and sometimes SoC) specific. Expressing them in a generic
> way for the cpu govenors to make sense of might be hard.

Doesn't the clock framework already handle this sort of thing?

Alan Stern



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-06-11 16:49    [W:0.266 / U:1.196 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site