Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2010 12:49:49 +0200
From: Florian Mickler <florian@mickler.org>
To: Vitaly Wool <vitalywool@gmail.com>
Cc: david@lang.hm, Brian Swetland <swetland@google.com>,
       Arve =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Hj=F8nnev=E5g?= <arve@android.com>,
       Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>, tytso@mit.edu,
       Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
       LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>,
       James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@suse.de>,
       Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
       Linux PM <linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
       Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
       Linux OMAP Mailing List <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
       Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
       Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
       Felipe Balbi <felipe.balbi@nokia.com>
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] suspend blockers & Android integration
Message-ID: <20100606124949.539fa636@schatten.dmk.lab>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinW-X5m85rUcqP-lrEdfBikVclJWgqiWDkpxnAc@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20100603193045.GA7188@elte.hu>
	<AANLkTikZP3bmckpfb_jUdG7qZO5W9DgpZ79ugtSZaEpt@mail.gmail.com>
	<20100604071354.GA14451@elte.hu>
	<AANLkTimH4ihf3QqtKFpfGXRKtO55PrUuff9JYtaEBG44@mail.gmail.com>
	<20100604083423.GD15181@elte.hu>
	<AANLkTinQyzzeF-NOAjrAqqQXqKjFJhx85nI4uyBGRtWd@mail.gmail.com>
	<1275653210.27810.39762.camel@twins>
	<AANLkTinyjBa0KYfFz3_EFbC65hoQFwFINlTDYjCe-wM3@mail.gmail.com>
	<1275731653.27810.41078.camel@twins>
	<20100605092851.6ee15f13@infradead.org>
	<AANLkTimEwznq9c_8lkuBMxEQ-42rdvpZEqA9Y71Cu-qC@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimKknOurmCffOpHjc1FjrP2MKf10pBwEEbLJPg_@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTil1NCX91bWhpXHtC88Opr29mNjdhXD9RXQ6DI0y@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTin1Za3GvfIKbcZdx6TzjIHzCvsg5uaY_Vk4nJIh@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTilQ1k78dDCYadOa1Wiyjm2nsBcRpxwdpGvYcf8z@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTin7oM3gVwHbIHWqYV8yeC6bbQ4q2jDDxAgz3DwQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<alpine.DEB.2.01.1006060305060.17462@asgard.lang.hm>
	<AANLkTinW-X5m85rUcqP-lrEdfBikVclJWgqiWDkpxnAc@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1409
Lines: 38

On Sun, 6 Jun 2010 12:19:08 +0200
Vitaly Wool <vitalywool@gmail.com> wrote:

> 2010/6/6  <david@lang.hm>:
> 
> > as an example (taken from this thread).
> >
> > system A needs to wake up to get a battery reading, store it and go back to
> > sleep, It does so every 10 seconds. But when it does so it only runs the one
> > process and then goes back to sleep.
> >
> > system B has the same need, but wakes up every 10 minutes. but when it does
> > so it fully wakes up and this allows the mail app to power up the radio,
> > connect to the Internet and start checking for new mail before oppurtunistic
> > sleep shuts things down (causing the mail check to fail)
> >
> > System A will last considerably longer on a battery than System B.
> 
> Exactly, thanks for pointing out the specific example :)
> 
> ~Vitaly

This does not affect suspend_blockers nor does suspend_blockers
interfere with that. 

Suspend_blockers allow the system to suspend ("mem">/sys/power/state
suspend), when the userspace decides that the device is not in use.

So implementing suspend_blockers support does not impact any
optimizations done to either system A nor system B.

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/