On Wednesday 19 May 2010, Felipe Balbi wrote: > On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 03:59:48PM +0200, ext James Bottomley wrote: > >On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 09:40 +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote: > >> On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 09:49:35PM +0200, ext James Bottomley wrote: > >> >Right, because Firmware writers are from the rugged unresponsive uplands > >> >of planet > >> >ignore-user-complaints-and-eat-them-for-breakfast-if-they-file-bugs and > >> >Software writers are from the emollient responsive groves of planet > >> >harmony. Obviously what would work for one wouldn't work for the other. > >> > > >> >As a software writer, I fully buy into that world view. The trouble is > >> >that when I go to dinner with hardware people, they seem to be awfully > >> >nice chaps ... almost exactly like me, in fact ... > >> > >> what does this add to suspend_blockers discussion ? > > > >Sorry I was evidently being too subtle. > > > >The point is that if, as you acknowledge, that you can't train firmware > >engineers to be responsive, there's no reason to think you can train > >software engineers in the same quality ... they're very similar people. > > I wouldn't say it's up to the engineer himself, it's more related to how > the company that person works for deal with such things. > > >The corollary is that real world systems have to operate in the face of > >misbehaving hardware *and* software. > > I still think the kernel shouldn't deal with broken applications and we > shouldn't try to fix them in kernel space. We can, of course, try to > find them and have all sorts of bells and whistles shouting 'process > %s is preventing CPU from sleeping for %llu nanoseconds' or something > like that. Please note that this approach is not too practical for vendors who ship systems like cell phones to the general public. Rafael _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
