On Mon, 31 May 2010 22:12:19 +0200 Florian Mickler <florian@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, 29 May 2010 20:12:14 +0200 > Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Why would you try to let buggy apps work as intended instead of break > > them as hard as possible? Such policy promotes crappy code since people > > get away with it. > > If I have a simple shell script then I don't wanna jump through > hoops just to please your fragile kernel. Also why should that code on one device kill my uptime and on the other machine (my wall-plugged desktop) work just well? That doesn't sound right. Clearly opportunistic suspend is a workaround for battery-driven devices and no general solution. But it is not specific to android. At least not inherently. It could be useful for any embedded or mobile device where you can clearly distinguish important functions from convenience functions. I really can't understand the whole _fundamental_ opposition to this design choice. Cheers, Flo _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
