[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1275023742.27810.7782.camel@twins>
Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 07:15:42 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
Paul@...p1.linux-foundation.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Florian Mickler <florian@...kler.org>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Linux OMAP Mailing List <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
felipe.balbi@...ia.com, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8)
On Thu, 2010-05-27 at 15:19 -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Thu, 27 May 2010, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > I still don't see how blocking applications will cause missed wakeups in
> > anything but a buggy application at worst, and even those will
> > eventually get the event when they unblock.
> >
> > What seems to be the confusion?
>
> During forced suspend, applications are block because they are frozen.
>
> When an event occurs, the application is notified somehow. But it
> can't respond because it is frozen. Hence the event remains sitting in
> a kernel queue and the system goes ahead and suspends anyway. The
> application doesn't get thawed until the system wakes up at some
> indefinite time in the future.
If the kernel is awake to put things in queues, we're clearly not
suspended and userspace is running ?!
--
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