[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1005272057500.31050-100000@netrider.rowland.org>
Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 20:59:24 -0400 (EDT)
From: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
cc: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
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>
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8)
On Fri, 28 May 2010, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > And the forced-suspend design relies on the fact that processes remain
> > frozen throughout. If we leave some processes unfrozen and one of them
> > somehow becomes runnable, that means we have to abort the forced
> > suspend before the process is allowed to run.
>
> We could avoid that if drivers could block tasks, but there are questions to
> answer. First off, how a driver is supposed to know when to block the task
> using it and when to do its power management transparently for the task?
> Second, how to intercept and block all possible interfaces that user space
> can use to talk to drivers (how to intercept a task using mmapped device, for
> example)?
We talked about this a few years ago and decided it was not feasible.
It would require substantial changes to every device driver.
Alan Stern
--
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