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

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Thursday 27 May 2010, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 27 May 2010, Alan Stern wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 27 May 2010, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > 
> > > Crap. Stop beating on those lost wakeup events. If we lose them then
> > > the drivers are broken and do not handle the switch over correctly. Or
> > > the suspend mechanism is broken as it does not evaluate the system
> > > state correctly. Blockers are just papering over that w/o tackling the
> > > real problem.
> > 
> > That's the point -- suspend does not evaluate the system state 
> > correctly because it doesn't have the necessary information.  Suspend 
> > blockers are a way of providing it that information.  They don't paper 
> > over the problem; they solve it.
> 
> Nonsense. The system state is well defined when a event is pending and
> we just have to say good bye to the idea that forced suspend is a good
> solution. It's not as it does not guarantee the event processing in
> badly written apps and it does move the power consumption to a later
> point in time for those apps which acquire/drop the blockers.

Well, now you have stated that Android actually doesn't work. :-)

Rafael
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/