[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100520112642.74d93d26@schatten.dmk.lab>
Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 11:26:42 +0200
From: Florian Mickler <florian@...kler.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] PM: Add suspend block api.
On Thu, 20 May 2010 11:11:11 +0200
Florian Mickler <florian@...kler.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 18 May 2010 15:11:11 +0200
> Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz> wrote:
>
> > On Thu 2010-05-13 21:11:06, Arve Hj??nnev??g wrote:
> > > Adds /sys/power/policy that selects the behaviour of /sys/power/state.
> > > After setting the policy to opportunistic, writes to /sys/power/state
> > > become non-blocking requests that specify which suspend state to
> > > enter
> >
> > Yeah, one file selects behavior of another file, and to read available
> > states for opportunistic, you have to write to file first.
> >
> > I still don't like the interface.
> >
>
> Actually, what would be a better interface?
>
> I wonder why it is not like this:
>
> /sys/power/state
> no change, works with and without opportunistic suspend the
> same. Ignores suspend blockers. Really no change. (From user
> perspective)
>
> /sys/power/opportunistic
> On / Off
> While Off the opportunistic suspend is off.
> While On, the opportunistic suspend is on and if there are no
> suspend blockers the system goes to suspend.
>
I forgot, of course there needs to be another knob to implement the
"on" behaviour in the opportunistic mode
/sys/power/block_opportunistic_suspend
There you have it. One file, one purpose.
> Cheers,
> Flo
--
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