Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932869Ab0FCGEd (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Jun 2010 02:04:33 -0400 Received: from mail-px0-f174.google.com ([209.85.212.174]:43111 "EHLO mail-px0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932819Ab0FCGEb (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Jun 2010 02:04:31 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:reply-to:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:user-agent; b=kwpTbeP576su9VTdm27rHVfC7w1hopwk7M1GWFdiZ2tNp5zx05XSxl2fyRolku2zyF jd8DMvB3cNmlGnUOTkJE+GJI67JBzODoGGGGIibdJrFGeIUg3pKNtcYUQURs/tX34keS QBNcFOR4TU4tTYw65wBpNQaO8SnVXfrhzjweQ= Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 23:04:44 -0700 From: mark gross <640e9920@gmail.com> To: Brian Swetland Cc: Neil Brown , Peter Zijlstra , "Paul@smtp1.linux-foundation.org" , LKML , Florian Mickler , James Bottomley , Linux PM , Thomas Gleixner , Linux OMAP Mailing List , Felipe Balbi , Alan Cox Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH] - race-free suspend. Was: Re: [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8) Message-ID: <20100603060444.GF11311@gvim.org> Reply-To: markgross@thegnar.org References: <20100601090023.788cabf4@notabene.brown> <201006010232.20263.rjw@sisk.pl> <20100601113309.609349fd@notabene.brown> <20100601122012.1edeaf48@notabene.brown> <20100602153235.340a7852@notabene.brown> <20100602180614.729246ea@notabene.brown> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2090 Lines: 44 On Wed, Jun 02, 2010 at 11:05:18AM -0700, Brian Swetland wrote: > On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 1:06 AM, Neil Brown wrote: > > On Wed, 2 Jun 2010 00:05:14 -0700 > > Arve Hj?nnev?g wrote: > >> > The user-space suspend daemon avoids losing wake-events by using > >> > fcntl(F_OWNER) to ensure it gets a signal whenever any important wake-event > >> > is ready to be read by user-space. ?This may involve: > >> > ?- the one daemon processing all wake events > >> > >> Wake up events are not all processed by one daemon. > > > > Not with your current user-space code, no. ?Are you saying that you are not > > open to any significant change in the Android user-space code? ?That would > > make the situation a lot harder to resolve. > > There are many wakeup events possible in a typical system -- > keypresses or other input events, network traffic, telephony events, > media events (fill audio buffer, fill video decoder buffer, etc), and > I think requiring that all wakeup event processing bottleneck through > a single userspace process is non-optimal here. Um doesn't the android framework bottleneck the user mode lock processing through the powermanager and any wake up event processing eventually has to grab a lock through this bottleneck anyway? > > The current suspend-blocker proposal already involves userspace > changes (it's different than our existing wakelock interface), and > we're certainly not opposed to any/all userspace changes on principle, > but on the other hand we're not interested in significant reworks of > userspace unless they actually improve the situation somehow. I think > bottlenecking events through a central daemon would represent a step > backwards. I'm not sure its a step in any direction, but I do understand the avoidance of having to rework a lot of code. --mgross -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/