[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20ADAB092842284E95860F279283C5642ED08D93@BGSMSX104.gar.corp.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2014 16:37:06 +0000
From: "Tc, Jenny" <jenny.tc@...el.com>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Zoran Markovic <zrn.markovic@...il.com>
CC: Anton Vorontsov <anton@...msg.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
"Arve Hjonnevag" <arve@...roid.com>,
Todd Poynor <toddpoynor@...gle.com>,
"John Stultz" <john.stultz@...aro.org>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH] pm: prevent suspend until power supply events are
processed
If the intention is to prevent suspend while processing the power supply uevents,
Isn't it a good option to use EPOLLWAKEUP? In Android, it's already used by
healthd to achieve the same.
-Jenny
> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] pm: prevent suspend until power supply events are
> processed
>
> On 4 September 2014 10:21, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> wrote:
> >>> >> + /* dependent power supplies (e.g. battery) may have changed
> >>> >> + * state as a result of this event, so poll again and hold
> >>> >> + * the wakeup_source until all events are processed.
> >>> >> + */
>
> But isn't this comment still incorrect? Its not about dependent supplies but the race
> between the work-handler and its enqueuing?
> --
> 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