[Uli Luckas <u.luckas@xxxxxxx>] > On Wednesday, 14. January 2009, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote: > > This adds /sys/power/wake_lock and /sys/power/wake_unlock. > > Writing a string to wake_lock creates a wake lock the > > first time is sees a string and locks it. Optionally, the > > string can be followed by a timeout. > > To unlock the wake lock, write the same string to wake_unlock. > > What happens if a process takes a lock and then dies? > Instead of using sysfs, how about using a device for this purpose which the > caller has to keep open as long as they want to hold the lock. On the android platform this is not a concern since only the system server manages wakelocks directly and processes use a higher level wakelock api in userspace that is remoted and handles this situation (the system server knows when a process dies and can clean up). For more general usage, the fd model does sound nicer, allowing cleanup-on-exit, etc. Arve -- is there a reason we went with sysfs? Brian _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
