Re: suspend blockers & Android integration

[Florian Mickler]

On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 19:16:55 -0700 (PDT)
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> The thing is, unless there is some _really_ deep other reason to do 
> something like this, I still think it's total overdesign to push any 
> knowledge/choices like this into the scheduler. I'd rather keep things way 
> more independent, less tied to each other and to deep kernel subsystems.
> 
> IOW, my personal opinion is that somethng like a suspend (blocker or not) 
> decision simply shouldn't be important enough to be tied into the 
> scheduler. Especially not if it could just be its own layer.
> 
> That said, as far as I know, the Android people have mostly been looking 
> at the suspend angle from a single-core standpoint. And I'm not at all 
> convinced that they should hijack the existing "/sys/power/state" thing 
> which is what I think they do now.
> 
> And those two things go together. The /sys/power/state thing is a global 
> suspend - which I don't think is appropriate for a opportunistic thing in 
> the first place, especially for multi-core.
> 

This sounds right. 

If there is soo much need for a better solution, it will emerge. With
merged suspend blockers or not.

Just my 2 cents.

> 			Linus

Cheers,
Flo
--
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/