Re: Attempted summary of suspend-blockers LKML thread, take three

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

 



On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 1:54 AM, Paul E. McKenney
<paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> o       "Ill-behaved application" AKA "untrusted application" AKA
>        "crappy application".

> o       "PM-driving application" are applications that are permitted
>        to acquire suspend blockers on Android.

These definitions are wrong.

1) There are trusted applications that misbehave (the user clicks Yes
when asked about PM permissions)
2) There are untrusted applications that are power optimized (The user
clicks No)

The proponents of suspend blockers in user-space have tried to ignore
this fact, but the truth is that PM permissions and power optimization
are orthogonal to each other.

-- 
Felipe Contreras
_______________________________________________
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