linux-kernel - Re: [RFD] Automatic suspend

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 17 Feb 2009 16:55:52 -0800
From:	mark gross <mgross@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Brian Swetland <swetland@...gle.com>
Cc:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	"Woodruff, Richard" <r-woodruff2@...com>,
	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
	Kyle Moffett <kyle@...fetthome.net>,
	Oliver Neukum <oliver@...kum.org>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	pm list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
	Nigel Cunningham <nigel@...el.suspend2.net>,
	Uli Luckas <u.luckas@...d.de>,
	Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@...ia.com>,
	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFD] Automatic suspend

On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 07:28:11AM -0800, Brian Swetland wrote:
> [Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>]
> > On Tue, 17 Feb 2009 06:20:01 -0800
> > Brian Swetland <swetland@...gle.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Of course that still doesn't address userspace.  Aggressively going to
> > > suspend lets us compensate for userspace programs that do somewhat
> > > silly things (I agree that it would be best if they didn't but they
> > > do and getting *everyone* to write their userspace code to avoid
> > > spinning or avoid waking up on short-duration timers to poll is a
> > > losing battle).
> > 
> > actually with powertop... on the open source side things are actually
> > won. It took all of 6 months...
> > I don't see that as a valid excuse. In fact, if this kind of solution
> > makes real userspace scheduled timers to be missed then I consider it a
> > serious functionality misfeature.
> 
> While you can't expect the kernel to solve all the problems of
> userspace, here's the broad situation one could end up in
> (note this specific sequence is generic and not based on any one
> specific product experience):
> 
> - carrier deploys a device 
> - carrier agrees to allow installation of arbitrary third party apps
>   without some horrible certification program requiring app authors
>   to jump through hoops, wait ages for approval, etc
> - users rejoice and install all kinds of apps
> - some apps are poorly written and impact battery life
> - users complain to carrier about battery life

Carrier pushes ISV for fix app, and updates that don't suck are
deployed.

Where is the problem?

--mgross

> 
> You will end up with some crappy apps that do really dumb things.
> However, even if they're badly written users may still install and use
> these apps because hey, they do something the user likes.
> 
> >From the Android standpoint, we're trying to balance protecting the
> system from poorly designed apps and somehow letting the user know "hey
> app X is chewing up a lot of power" (work in progress on this).
> 
> While I'd love for every app developer to actively tune their apps for a
> good mobile experience, I am skeptical that this is going to happen.
> 
> Brian
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/