Hi! > > > > Yeah, one file selects behavior of another file, and to read available > > > > states for opportunistic, you have to write to file first. > > > > > > > > I still don't like the interface. > > > > > > > > > > Actually, what would be a better interface? > > > > > > I wonder why it is not like this: > > Because I think the "forced" and "opportunistic" suspend "modes" are mutually > exclusive in practice and the interface as proposed reflects that quite well. Why should they be? Forced disk while opportunistic mem is active makes a lot of sense. If code can't support it now, just return -EINVAL, but please don't cripple the interface just because of that. > > > /sys/power/state > > > no change, works with and without opportunistic suspend the > > > same. Ignores suspend blockers. Really no change. (From user > > > perspective) > > > > > > /sys/power/opportunistic > > > On / Off > > > While Off the opportunistic suspend is off. > > > While On, the opportunistic suspend is on and if there are no > > > suspend blockers the system goes to suspend. > > > > > > > I forgot, of course there needs to be another knob to implement the > > "on" behaviour in the opportunistic mode > > > > /sys/power/block_opportunistic_suspend > > > > There you have it. One file, one purpose. > > That's getting messy IMHO. > > In addition to that you get a nice race when the user writes "mem" > to /sys/power/state and opportunistic suspend happens at the same > time. It should not opportunistically suspend when it has work to do (like entering forced suspend). Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
