On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 10:38:53PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > > To conclude, I'm not sure about the approach. In particular, I'm not sure > > > if the benefit is worth the effort and the resulting complications (ie. the > > > possibility of having to deal with wakeup signals not requested by user > > > space) seem to be a bit too far reaching. > > > > > > Greg, what do you think? > > > > I agree with you in that I don't think that this type of feature is > > valid at the moment. > > Our current "solution" is low level suspend code on Zaurus directly > looking at charger state and doing the "wakeup or not" decision by hand. > > > I don't understand why our current situation doesn't work, what are we > > lacking that is needed for these systems that we have not seen > > before? > > It works, but it is ugly; and it seems samsung now needs similar > hacks. > > > What is the root problem that this is trying to solve? > > It is trying to fix machines that need to run periodic kernel tasks > even when user asked them to sleep. Zaurus needs to periodicaly wake > up to be able to charge battery in s2ram state, for example. That sounds like a bug in userspace you are trying to work around. Why not solve it there first? thanks, greg k-h _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
