Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 6)

From: Felipe Balbi
Date: Thu May 20 2010 - 14:50:42 EST

On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:40:17AM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> Some apps do abuse kernel mechanisms, and whether the bug is in the
> app or that kernel mechanism can be a judgement call. I'd expect to

hey come on, there's no judgement call for an app polling every second
to check battery status or some other status that doesn't change that

> I may have overlooked it, in one of the 100K messsages in my mailbox
> about versions of suspend block/etc patches ...
> But surely NOBODY is actually contending that broken aps NOT get
> fixed??
> It's clear to me that tools are needed to identify power hogs;
> powertop can't be the extent of such tools. (ISTR it doesn't monitor
> display power usage, for one thing; maybe newer versions do so.) Once
> such hogs get identified they will need to get fixed. Any other
> proposal seems broken to me...

that's my feeling too. I don't see any needs for suspend blockers in any
real system. I acknowledge we need tools probing power consumption to be
shipped to production device, that's a good idea, but forcing apps to
modify just to have that UI fill up some treeview, I think it's a bit
too much.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at