Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756177Ab0FEREc (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Jun 2010 13:04:32 -0400 Received: from mail-bw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.214.46]:45680 "EHLO mail-bw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753145Ab0FEREa (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Jun 2010 13:04:30 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=TMCsDFIl0nIFT0H9eGUOCpwCzdtKV1h459MwbTPtJhzhc62E3QmfmxFNBPWoE+N6it VnsJu2Ff2d44Q2nYFBCwbLBqz/NMO8MVxPhNKSwFTmU6KuoZzlgzxnk0HNl+MwnVUEs5 aei0LaNdb8PtAOxNrECamx/khQDnE8eCrGmow= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20100531224732.2073828d@schatten.dmk.lab> References: <20100527222514.0a1710bf@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20100527230806.4deb6de3@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20100527220949.GB10602@srcf.ucam.org> <20100527232357.6d14fdb2@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20100527223605.GB11364@srcf.ucam.org> <20100527235546.09f3ce8a@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20100528043114.GC26177@thunk.org> <1275030704.32462.11.camel@laptop> <1275120618.27810.12699.camel@twins> <1275149418.4503.128.camel@mulgrave.site> <1275156734.1645.496.camel@laptop> <20100531221219.212bf119@schatten.dmk.lab> <20100531224732.2073828d@schatten.dmk.lab> Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2010 20:04:28 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8) From: Felipe Contreras To: Florian Mickler Cc: Peter Zijlstra , James Bottomley , =?UTF-8?B?QXJ2ZSBIasO4bm5ldsOlZw==?= , tytso@mit.edu, LKML , Linux PM , Thomas Gleixner , Linux OMAP Mailing List , felipe.balbi@nokia.com, Alan Cox Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1556 Lines: 38 On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 11:47 PM, Florian Mickler wrote: > On Mon, 31 May 2010 22:12:19 +0200 > Florian Mickler 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@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/