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

[Felipe Contreras]

On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 11:47 PM, Florian Mickler <florian@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, 31 May 2010 22:12:19 +0200
> Florian Mickler <florian@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> If I have a simple shell script then I don't wanna jump through
>> hoops just to please your fragile kernel.
>
> Also why should that code on one device kill my uptime and on the
> other machine (my wall-plugged desktop) work just well? That doesn't
> sound right.

Sounds perfectly right to me; one code runs perfectly fine on one
machine, and on the other doesn't even compile. Well, sure, it wasn't
written with that use-case in mind.

> Clearly opportunistic suspend is a workaround for battery-driven devices
> and no general solution. But it is not specific to android. At least
> not inherently. It could be useful for any embedded or mobile device
> where you can clearly distinguish important functions from convenience
> functions.

Yes, it could, but why go for the hacky solution when we know how to
achieve the ideal one?

> I really can't understand the whole _fundamental_ opposition to this
> design choice.

Nobody is using it, except Android. Nobody will use it, except Android.

I have seen recent proposals that don't require changing the whole
user-space. That might actually be used by other players.

-- 
Felipe Contreras
--
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/