Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932751Ab0FEUua (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Jun 2010 16:50:30 -0400 Received: from ist.d-labs.de ([213.239.218.44]:52080 "EHLO mx01.d-labs.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932163Ab0FEUu3 (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Jun 2010 16:50:29 -0400 Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2010 22:50:12 +0200 From: Florian Mickler To: Felipe Contreras Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Arve =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Hj=F8nnev?= =?ISO-8859-15?Q?=E5g?= , Thomas Gleixner , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Matthew Garrett , Alan Stern , Paul@smtp1.linux-foundation.org, LKML , felipe.balbi@nokia.com, Linux OMAP Mailing List , Linux PM , Alan Cox Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8) Message-ID: <20100605225012.771332db@schatten.dmk.lab> In-Reply-To: References: <201005312347.24251.rjw@sisk.pl> <1275471561.27810.30865.camel@twins> <1275474088.27810.31000.camel@twins> <20100602221309.6da754e7@schatten.dmk.lab> <1275550802.27810.34863.camel@twins> <20100603161205.73a2b56d@schatten.dmk.lab> <1275578881.27810.35995.camel@twins> <20100605215604.68efc4e5@schatten.dmk.lab> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.5 (GTK+ 2.18.9; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2391 Lines: 55 On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 23:06:03 +0300 Felipe Contreras wrote: > On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 10:56 PM, Florian Mickler wrote: > > On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 20:30:40 +0300 > > Felipe Contreras wrote: > >> I don't think the suspend blockers solve much. A bad application will > >> behave bad on any system. Suppose somebody decides to port Firefox to > >> Android, and forgets to listen to the screen off event (bad on Android > >> or Maemo), however, notices the application behaves very badly, so by > >> googling finds these suspend blockers, and enables them all the time > >> the application runs. > >> > >> When the user install the application, will be greeted by a warning > >> "This application might break PM, do you want to enable suspend > >> blockers?" (or whatever), as any typical user would do, will press Yes > >> (whatever). > >> > >> We end up in exactly the same situation. > >> > > No. The application will show up in the suspend blocker stats and the > > user will remember: "Oh, yes. There was a warning about that. Well I > > think I'm going to file a bug there." > > How would such stats be calculated? I presume at regular intervals you > check which applications are holding suspend blockers and increase a > counter. > > How would you do that with the dynamic PM approach? At regular > intervals you check for which applications are running (not idle). IIRC, the patches discussed have debugging infrastructure in them. The kernel does the accounting. > > > The only difference is, that with suspend blockers, he can than > > dismiss the applications permission to block suspend and will not miss > > his job interview the next day because his phones battery run > > out. And also he can use the application to a certain extent. > > So the difference is between removing the app, and making it run > crappy. I don't think that's a strong argument in favor of suspend > blockers. > If you think a little about it, it is. Because if the app wouldn't be usable at all, the bug wouldn't get fixed because the user wouldn't use it. Or not? Cheers, Flo -- 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/