On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 1:06 AM, Neil Brown <neilb@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, 2 Jun 2010 00:05:14 -0700 > Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > The user-space suspend daemon avoids losing wake-events by using >> > fcntl(F_OWNER) to ensure it gets a signal whenever any important wake-event >> > is ready to be read by user-space. This may involve: >> > - the one daemon processing all wake events >> >> Wake up events are not all processed by one daemon. > > Not with your current user-space code, no. Are you saying that you are not > open to any significant change in the Android user-space code? That would > make the situation a lot harder to resolve. There are many wakeup events possible in a typical system -- keypresses or other input events, network traffic, telephony events, media events (fill audio buffer, fill video decoder buffer, etc), and I think requiring that all wakeup event processing bottleneck through a single userspace process is non-optimal here. The current suspend-blocker proposal already involves userspace changes (it's different than our existing wakelock interface), and we're certainly not opposed to any/all userspace changes on principle, but on the other hand we're not interested in significant reworks of userspace unless they actually improve the situation somehow. I think bottlenecking events through a central daemon would represent a step backwards. Brian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
