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

[Brian Swetland]

On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 8:03 AM, Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sat, 29 May 2010, Brian Swetland wrote:
>> On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 7:10 AM, Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > If no such constraints are active, the QoS-based suspend blocks in an
>> > interruptible wait until the number of active QOS_EVENTUALLY
>> > constraints drops to 0. ÂWhen that happens, it carries out a normal
>> > suspend-to-RAM -- except that it checks along the way to make sure that
>> > no new QoS constraints are activated while the suspend is in progress.
>> > If they are, the PM core backs out and fails the QoS-based suspend.
>>
>> The issue with this approach is that if userspace wants to suspend
>> while a driver is holding a QOS_EVENTUALLY constraint, it's basically
>> going to spin constantly writing "qos" and failing.
>
> No, no. ÂIf userspace wants to suspend while a driver is holding a
> QOS_EVENTUALLY constraint, the user process blocks in an interruptible
> wait state as described in the first paragraph above.

Oops -- I misread the first paragraph.  The behavior you described is
indeed what I would want.

Brian
--
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/