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]

Message-Id: <200902201149.37921.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date:	Fri, 20 Feb 2009 11:49:36 +0100
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>
Cc:	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
	"Woodruff, Richard" <r-woodruff2@...com>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	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>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
	Nigel Cunningham <nigel@...el.suspend2.net>,
	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
	mark gross <mgross@...ux.intel.com>,
	Uli Luckas <u.luckas@...d.de>,
	Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@...ia.com>,
	Brian Swetland <swetland@...gle.com>,
	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFD] Automatic suspend

On Friday 20 February 2009, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 2:08 PM, Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu> wrote:
> >> > It might have to be platform-specific.  The Android people seem to have a
> >> > pretty good idea of what criteria will work for them.
> >>
> >> I'd really like to know in what situations Androind is supposed to suspend
> >> automatically.
> >
> > It might be better to ask in what situations Android is _not_ supposed
> > to sleep automatically.  In other words, in what situations is a
> > wakelock acquired?  Since the whole system is only a phone, this
> > question should have a reasonably well-defined answer.
> 
> On an android phone, any code that needs to run when the screen is off
> must hold a wakelock (directly or indirectly). In general if an
> application or the system is processing an event that may cause a user
> notification (new email, incoming phone call, alarm, etc.) it needs to
> prevent suspend. But, we also use wakelocks to upload stats or
> download system updates in the background, and for media player or
> (gps) data logging applications.

All of this doesn't seem to require wakelocks acuired from kernel space.
What do you need those wakelocks for?

Rafael
--
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/