Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 2 Jun 2010 03:00:01 -0700 | Subject | Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8) | From | Arve Hjønnevåg <> |
| |
2010/6/2 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>: > On Wed, 2010-06-02 at 01:54 -0700, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote: >> No I want you to stop confusing low power idle modes with suspend. > > I think it is you who is confused. For power management purposes suspend > is nothing more but a deep idle state.
No, idle is transparent, suspend is not.
> > (and please don't mention @#$@ up x86 ACPI again, Intel knows, they're > fixing it, get over it already). >
I don't think it is realistic to drop support for all existing hardware.
>> Unrelated to >> Android, I also want to use opportunistic suspend on my desktop. > > So you're going to sprinkle this suspend blocker shite all over regular > userspace?
I have said several times, that regular user-space will not need to be modified to maintain their current behavior.
> Why not instead work on getting apps to behave properly and > idle when there's nothing to do? > > After all, if you have the code to add suspend blockers into, you also > have the means to fix it being stupid in the first place. >
Why would I add suspend blockers to the code I want to prevent running?
-- Arve Hjønnevåg -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |