On Wed, 26 May 2010 15:29:32 +0300 Felipe Balbi <felipe.balbi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > hi, > > On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 02:24:30PM +0200, ext Florian Mickler wrote: > >And if you have two kernels, one with which your device is dead after 1 > >hour and one with which your device is dead after 10 hours. Which would > >you prefer? I mean really... this is ridiculous. > > What I find ridiculous is the assumption that kernel should provide good > power management even for badly written applications. They should work, > of course, but there's no assumption that the kernel should cope with > those applications and provide good battery usage on those cases. > > You can install and run anything on the device, and they will work as > they should (they will be scheduled and will be processed) but you can't > expect the kernel to prevent that application from waking up the CPU > every 10 ms simply because someone didn't think straight while writting > the app. > But then someone at the user side has to know what he is doing. I fear, if you target mass market without central distribution channels, you can not assume that much. Cheers, Flo _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
