Re: suspend blockers & Android integration

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, 10 Jun 2010, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:

> Moreover, having thought a bit more about the "power manager in user space"
> concept I'm not sure if it really is that better than the original wakelocks
> idea.  Namely, it only repaces a kernel-based mechanism with a user space
> task doing basically the same thing, but the communication between that task
> and the other cooperating user space tasks is arguably more complicated (it
> also uses the kernel resources, although indirectly).

That is all true.  The "power manager in userspace" was meant to prove
a point: that this _could_ be done without invasive changes to the
kernel.  It wasn't necessarily meant to be a _better_ solution.

> So, for a phone-like system, where you'd generally want to simplify user space,
> having a "power manager" in the kernel seems to make sense to me.

This is a judgment call.  Obviously different people have different 
opinions.

Alan Stern

_______________________________________________
linux-pm mailing list
linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm


[Index of Archives]     [Linux ACPI]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [CPU Freq]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux