On Tue, 10 Feb 2009, Brian Swetland wrote: > [Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxx>] > > > > > > wake_lock never blocks. > > > > Wakelock is really bad name: it is not a lock and it does not protect > > wake. I'd say we need better name here. > > I agree with you here -- I've had this discussion with Arve previously, > but have been unable to offer a compelling alternative name. Anybody > have a good idea? delay_sleep or delaysleep? block_sleep or blocksleep? Any of the above with "sleep" replaced by "suspend"? Alan Stern _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
