On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 10:56 PM, Florian Mickler <florian@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 20:30:40 +0300 > Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> I don't think the suspend blockers solve much. A bad application will >> behave bad on any system. Suppose somebody decides to port Firefox to >> Android, and forgets to listen to the screen off event (bad on Android >> or Maemo), however, notices the application behaves very badly, so by >> googling finds these suspend blockers, and enables them all the time >> the application runs. >> >> When the user install the application, will be greeted by a warning >> "This application might break PM, do you want to enable suspend >> blockers?" (or whatever), as any typical user would do, will press Yes >> (whatever). >> >> We end up in exactly the same situation. >> > No. The application will show up in the suspend blocker stats and the > user will remember: "Oh, yes. There was a warning about that. Well I > think I'm going to file a bug there." How would such stats be calculated? I presume at regular intervals you check which applications are holding suspend blockers and increase a counter. How would you do that with the dynamic PM approach? At regular intervals you check for which applications are running (not idle). > The only difference is, that with suspend blockers, he can than > dismiss the applications permission to block suspend and will not miss > his job interview the next day because his phones battery run > out. And also he can use the application to a certain extent. So the difference is between removing the app, and making it run crappy. I don't think that's a strong argument in favor of suspend blockers. -- Felipe Contreras -- 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
