On Friday 27 February 2009, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > > > Then, the decision making logic will be able to use /sys/power/sleep whenever > > > > it wishes to and the kernel will be able to refuse to suspend if it's not > > > > desirable at the moment. > > > > > > > > It seems to be flexible enough to me. > > > > > > This seems flexible enough to avoid race conditions, but it forces the > > > user space power manager to poll when the kernel refuse suspend. > > > > And if the kernel is supposed to start automatic suspend, it has to monitor > > all of the wakelocks. IMO, it's better to allow the power manager to poll the > > kernel if it refuses to suspend. > > polling is evil -- it keeps CPU wake up => wastes power. > > Wakelocks done right are single atomic_t... and if you set it to 0, > you just unblock "sleeper" thread or something. Zero polling and very > simple... Except that you have to check all of the wakelocks periodically in a loop => polling. So? Rafael _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
