Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754965Ab0FFKhF (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Jun 2010 06:37:05 -0400 Received: from www.tglx.de ([62.245.132.106]:47000 "EHLO www.tglx.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751115Ab0FFKhC (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Jun 2010 06:37:02 -0400 Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2010 12:36:21 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner To: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Arve_Hj=F8nnev=E5g?= cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , tytso@mit.edu, Brian Swetland , Neil Brown , Alan Stern , Felipe Balbi , LKML , Florian Mickler , Linux OMAP Mailing List , Linux PM , Alan Cox , James Bottomley , Linus Torvalds , Kevin Hilman , "H. Peter Anvin" , Arjan van de Ven Subject: Re: suspend blockers & Android integration In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20100603193045.GA7188@elte.hu> <20100603232302.GA16184@elte.hu> <1275644619.27810.39462.camel@twins> <201006050138.30859.rjw@sisk.pl> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LFD 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="8323328-339667858-1275819785=:2933" Content-ID: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3332 Lines: 81 This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --8323328-339667858-1275819785=:2933 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-ID: On Sat, 5 Jun 2010, Arve Hj?nnev?g wrote: > 2010/6/5 Thomas Gleixner : > > On Sat, 5 Jun 2010, Arve Hj?nnev?g wrote: > >> 2010/6/5 Thomas Gleixner : > >> > On Sat, 5 Jun 2010, Arve Hj?nnev?g wrote: > >> >> >> > That download might take a minute or two, but that's not an > >> >> >> > justification for the crapplication to run unconfined and prevent > >> >> >> > lower power states. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >> >> >> I agree, but this is not a simple problem to solve. > >> >> > > >> >> > Not with suspend blockers, but with cgroup confinement of crap, it's > >> >> > straight forward. > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> I don't think is is straight forward. If the a process in the frozen > >> >> group holds a resource that a process in the unfrozen group needs, how > >> >> do deal with that? > >> > > >> > I'm going to fix the framework which puts the group into freeze state > >> > w/o making sure that there is no held shared resource. Come on it's > >> > not rocket science. > >> > > >> > >> I'm not sure which framework you are talking about here, but I don't > >> think there is a single framework that knows about all shared > >> resources. > > > > Damn, it's not me talking about "our framework", you are mentioning > > when it fits your needs. > > You said you were going to fix the framework. I did know if you were > talking about the cgroup framework, or the android user-space > frameworks. I don't think either has knowledge about all shared > resources. The cgroup freezer makes sure that there are no in kernel resources blocked. Of course the user space side has to do the same and it's not rocket science. > > > > If you do not have a clearly defined user space framework, then we > > talk about a completely random conglomeration of applications which > > need to be brought into submission by some global brute force > > approach. > > > > I'm tired of this, really. You just use terminlology as it fits to > > defend the complete design failure of android. But you fail to trick > > me :) > > > > Can you please explain in a consistent way how the application stack > > and the underlying framework (which exists according to android docs) > > is handling events and how the separation of trust level works ? > > > > I don't think I can, since I only know small parts of it. I know some Sigh. That's the main reason why this discussion goes nowhere. How in heavens sake can we make a decision whether suspend blockers are the right and only way to go, when the people > events like input event go though a single thread in our system > process, while other events like network packets (which are also > wakeup events) goes directly to the app. --8323328-339667858-1275819785=:2933-- -- 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/