On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 8:03 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sunday 02 May 2010, Alan Stern wrote: >> On Sun, 2 May 2010, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> >> > Hmm. It doesn't seem to be possible to create two different suspend blockers >> > using the same file handle. So, what exactly is a process supposed to do to >> > use two suspend blockers at the same time? >> >> Open the file twice, thereby obtaining two file handles. > > Well, that's what I thought. > > I must admit I'm not really comfortable with this interface. IMO it would > be better if _open() created the suspend blocker giving it a name based on > the name of the process that called it. Something like > "<process name>_<timestamp>" might work at first sight. > > Alternatively, "<process_name><number>", where <number> is 0 for the first > suspend blocker created by the given process, 1 for the second one etc., also > seems to be doable. I think it is important to let user-space specify the name. If a process uses multiple suspend blockers, it is impossible to tell what each one is used for if they are automatically named. -- Arve Hjønnevåg _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
