On Wed, 2010-05-26 at 11:18 -0500, James Bottomley wrote: > > Or make the suspend manager a C proglet and provide a JNI interface, > > or whatever. > > It's a fairly large piece of code to try to rewrite in C, so I don't > think that's feasible on a reasonable timescale. Android does have the > concept of special sockets that can be used to communicate from less to > more privileged processes (it has a very segmented runtime model), so > these might be usable ... they have a drawback that they're essentially > named pipes, so no multiplexing, but one per suspend influencing C > process shouldn't be a huge burden. It wouldn't need to convert the whole Frameworks layer into C, just enough to manage the suspend state. Anyway, I think there's been enough arguments against even the concept of opportunistic/auto-suspend, and I for one will object with a NAK if Rafael send this to Linus. The whole idea of segregating userspace like that, and not letting runnable thing run is very ill considered indeed. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
