On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 08:47:36PM -0800, 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? nodoz (just kidding) names are always hard for me. What you are talking about is constraining entry to low power states. (mostly) > > Some people use "sleep vote" for a similar mechanism (though usually > you're voting against sleep, which makes it feel backwards to me). with what OS? --mgross _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
