[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100526142430.327ccbc4@schatten.dmk.lab>
Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 14:24:30 +0200
From: Florian Mickler <florian@...kler.org>
To: Vitaly Wool <vitalywool@...il.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Paul@...p1.linux-foundation.org, felipe.balbi@...ia.com,
Linux OMAP Mailing List <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8)
On Wed, 26 May 2010 14:01:49 +0200
Vitaly Wool <vitalywool@...il.com> wrote:
> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 1:37 PM, Florian Mickler <florian@...kler.org> wrote:
>
> > This is not "protection". This is functioning properly in a real world
> > scenario. Why would the user change the kernel, if the device would be
> > buggy after that? (Except maybe he is a geek)
>
> Hmm... Why would the user continue to use the program if it slows down
> his device and sucks the battery as a vampire (Except maybe he's a
> moron)? ;)
>
> ~Vitaly
Because he is using a robust kernel that provides suspend blockers and
is preventing the vampire from sucking power?
Most users don't even grasp the simple concept of different "programs".
They just have a device and click here and there and are happy.
Really, what are you getting at? Do you deny that there are programs,
that prevent a device from sleeping? (Just think of the bouncing
cows app)
And if you have two kernels, one with which your device is dead after 1
hour and one with which your device is dead after 10 hours. Which would
you prefer? I mean really... this is ridiculous.
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