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: <AANLkTinPUNer7XhAqS4VSWhOxqjEjaHtr76EK5tzYYjJ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sat, 5 Jun 2010 20:04:28 +0300
From:	Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@...il.com>
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, May 31, 2010 at 11:47 PM, Florian Mickler <florian@...kler.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 31 May 2010 22:12:19 +0200
> Florian Mickler <florian@...kler.org> wrote:
>> 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.

Sounds perfectly right to me; one code runs perfectly fine on one
machine, and on the other doesn't even compile. Well, sure, it wasn't
written with that use-case in mind.

> 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.

Yes, it could, but why go for the hacky solution when we know how to
achieve the ideal one?

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

Nobody is using it, except Android. Nobody will use it, except Android.

I have seen recent proposals that don't require changing the whole
user-space. That might actually be used by other players.

-- 
Felipe Contreras
--
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/