On Sat, 29 May 2010 10:28:19 +0200 Florian Mickler <florian@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, 29 May 2010 02:42:35 +0300 > Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 5:12 PM, Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > ext Brian Swetland wrote: > > >> How is it flawed? Serious question. > > > > > > I would avoid repeating all the good arguments given so far, but to make it > > > short: > > > > > > * I believe runtime PM is a much better starting point (at least for the > > > type of HW targeted at mobile devices) because it mimics an always-on system > > > toward userspace, which requires less disruption in the way apps are > > > designed > > > > I agree. > > > > If I understand correctly, if we have a perfect user-space that only > > does work when strictly needed and trying to do it in bursts, then we > > would be reaching the lowest power state, and there would be no need > > for suspend. The problem is that Android's user-space is pretty far > > from that, so they said "let's segregate user-space and go to lower > > power mode anyway". > > This has already been mentioned (who knew?): Android doesn't > want to depend on userspace for this. there is an implicit "all of userspace" in there, btw.. > > Cheers, > Flo _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
