On Fri, May 07, 2010 at 02:30:20PM -0700, Daniel Walker wrote: > On Fri, 2010-05-07 at 22:03 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > > Here's a different example. A process is waiting for a keypress, but > > because it's badly written it's also drawing to the screen at 60 frames > > per second and preventing the system from every going to idle. How do > > you quiesce the system while still ensuring that the keypress will be > > delivered to the application? > > To me it's somewhat of a negative for suspend blockers. Since to solve > the problem you give above you would have to use a suspend blocker in an > asynchronous way (locked in an interrupt, released in a thread too) > assuming I understand your example. I've had my share of semaphore > nightmares, and I'm not too excited to see a protection scheme (i.e. a > lock) which allows asynchronous usage like suspend blockers. Check the input patch for an example of this. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
