On Thu, 10 Jun 2010, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > Moreover, having thought a bit more about the "power manager in user space" > concept I'm not sure if it really is that better than the original wakelocks > idea. Namely, it only repaces a kernel-based mechanism with a user space > task doing basically the same thing, but the communication between that task > and the other cooperating user space tasks is arguably more complicated (it > also uses the kernel resources, although indirectly). That is all true. The "power manager in userspace" was meant to prove a point: that this _could_ be done without invasive changes to the kernel. It wasn't necessarily meant to be a _better_ solution. > So, for a phone-like system, where you'd generally want to simplify user space, > having a "power manager" in the kernel seems to make sense to me. This is a judgment call. Obviously different people have different opinions. Alan Stern -- 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
