[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100527181433.GG3543@srcf.ucam.org>
Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 19:14:33 +0100
From: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Paul@...p1.linux-foundation.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Florian Mickler <florian@...kler.org>, felipe.balbi@...ia.com,
Linux OMAP Mailing List <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8)
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 08:02:13PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-05-27 at 18:57 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > If you want to support forced suspend for laptops and you want to avoid
> > the risk of losing wakeups then you need in-kernel suspend blockers.
> > That's entirely orthogonal to Android's runtime power management.
>
> The simple fact of life is, on PC style hardware suspend is mostly about
> missing events. I really _really_ want to miss mouse movement of my
> bluetooth mouse when the gear is stowed in my backpack.
That's fine - those shouldn't be configured as wakeup events.
> Its perfectly OK to miss events on _forced_ suspend.
No, it's not. Forced suspend may be in response to hitting a key, but it
may also be in response to a 30 minute timeout expiring. If I get a WoL
packet in the 0.5 of a second between userspace deciding to suspend and
actually doing so, the system shouldn't suspend.
--
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@...f.ucam.org
--
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