On Thursday, June 10, 2010, Alan Stern wrote: > 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. Agreed. Rafael _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
