linux-kernel - Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20100531224732.2073828d@schatten.dmk.lab>
Date:	Mon, 31 May 2010 22:47:32 +0200
From:	Florian Mickler <florian@...kler.org>
To:	Florian Mickler <florian@...kler.org>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...e.de>,
	Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>,
	tytso@....edu, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.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 Mon, 31 May 2010 22:12:19 +0200
Florian Mickler <florian@...kler.org> wrote:

> On Sat, 29 May 2010 20:12:14 +0200
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> > 
> > Why would you try to let buggy apps work as intended instead of break
> > them as hard as possible? Such policy promotes crappy code since people
> > get away with it.
> 
> If I have a simple shell script then I don't wanna jump through
> hoops just to please your fragile kernel. 

Also why should that code on one device kill my uptime and on the
other machine (my wall-plugged desktop) work just well? That doesn't
sound right.

Clearly opportunistic suspend is a workaround for battery-driven devices
and no general solution. But it is not specific to android. At least
not inherently. It could be useful for any embedded or mobile device
where you can clearly distinguish important functions from convenience
functions.

I really can't understand the whole _fundamental_ opposition to this
design choice. 

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/