[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100816175503.1f9b72bc@virtuousgeek.org>
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 17:55:03 -0700
From: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>
To: Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@...il.com>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
david@...g.hm, Brian Swetland <swetland@...gle.com>,
linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
arve@...roid.com, mjg59@...f.ucam.org, florian@...kler.org,
rjw@...k.pl, peterz@...radead.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
menage@...gle.com, david-b@...bell.net, James.Bottomley@...e.de,
arjan@...radead.org, swmike@....pp.se, galibert@...ox.com,
dipankar@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: Attempted summary of suspend-blockers LKML thread, take three
On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 20:20:32 -0400
Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 08:16:55AM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> > Fortunately in this case the problem doesn't seem to be fatal. We've
> > already established that the userland API portion of suspend blockers
> > could be implemented in userspace with a bit more work, given that the
> > kernel problems with suspend/resume and events are addressed.
> > Hopefully Google is already developing a prototype userspace
> > implementation to make sure it's workable; being able to build stock
> > upstream kernels for my Droid and its Android userspace sure would be
> > nice.
>
> You know, you don't have to wait for the Android engineers to do this
> work. You (or others who want to be able to use stock upstream kernel
> with Android devices) could just as easily try to do the "bit more
> work" yourselves --- that is, do the open souce thing and scratch
> one's own itch.
Sure, I could. And the Google guys could put together a whole Debian
distro with suspend blockers sprinkled throughout various apps. But
for my part, I can't justify that kind of work at the moment. Of
course I'd be happy if someone could and did do the work, it would be a
useful exercise and potentially allow Android to work well on stock
kernels.
> After all, Rafael is saying he's refusing to accept patches (or
> implement) in-kernel oppunsitic suspend for upstream unless it's
> proven to him that a userspace implementation isn't sufficient. It
> might be just as fair for the Android userspace upstream to refuse to
> accept (or engineer) userspace changes unless it is proven that the
> userspace version of opporunistic suspend is just as good as the
> in-kernel version which is successfully been deployed in millions and
> millions of shipping units today...
>
> Speaking personally, it's not clear to me how waking up a userspace
> suspend daemon and waiting for it to get scheduled will result in
> better power savings than simply handling it in the kernel, but as
> soon as someone is willing to do the work, we can find out for sure
> who is right.
Yeah it would add some overhead, since suspend blocker calls would use
IPC to a userspace daemon, which would also be responsible for
(periodically?) waking up to see if the system ought to be
suspended... I agree coding it up would be a useful exercise.
--
Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
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