[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1208206056.6958.176.camel@pasglop>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 06:47:36 +1000
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc: David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
pm list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Alexey Starikovskiy <astarikovskiy@...e.de>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Oliver Neukum <oliver@...kum.org>,
Nigel Cunningham <ncunningham@...a.org.au>,
Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] PM: Introduce new top level suspend and
hibernation callbacks (rev. 8)
On Mon, 2008-04-14 at 10:51 -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Apr 2008, David Brownell wrote:
>
> > I sort of agree. Looking at it from a whole-system perspective,
> > suspending needs to be able to chitchat with userspace ... and I
> > don't think that can be done *before* writing to /sys/power/state
> > in an acceptably generic/portable way. (Briefly, applications
> > need to have clean stopping points and be able to arrange system
> > wakeup. They may well have more work to do than most drivers.)
>
> Pavel's recent work aside, the only way to initiate a system sleep is
> from userspace. So it seems natural for all application notifications
> to be made by the initiating program, perhaps via dbus.
No. Certainly not via dbus.
Ben.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists