Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755515Ab0HBVfs (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Aug 2010 17:35:48 -0400 Received: from ogre.sisk.pl ([217.79.144.158]:57640 "EHLO ogre.sisk.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751255Ab0HBVfq (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Aug 2010 17:35:46 -0400 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com Subject: Re: Attempted summary of suspend-blockers LKML thread Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 23:33:32 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.35-rjw+; KDE/4.4.4; x86_64; ; ) Cc: Arjan van de Ven , linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, arve@android.com, mjg59@srcf.ucam.org, pavel@ucw.cz, florian@mickler.org, stern@rowland.harvard.edu, swetland@google.com, peterz@infradead.org, tglx@linutronix.de, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk References: <20100731175841.GA9367@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <201008021552.20505.rjw@sisk.pl> <20100802203609.GG2405@linux.vnet.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <20100802203609.GG2405@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201008022333.32623.rjw@sisk.pl> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3406 Lines: 67 On Monday, August 02, 2010, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Mon, Aug 02, 2010 at 03:52:20PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Monday, August 02, 2010, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > On Sun, Aug 01, 2010 at 03:47:08PM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > > > On Sun, 1 Aug 2010 12:12:28 -0700 > > > > "Paul E. McKenney" wrote: > > ... > > > > Another one: freezing whole cgroups..... we have that today. it > > > > actually works quite well.... of course the hard part is the decision > > > > what to put in which cgroup, and at what frequency and duration you let > > > > cgroups run. > > > > > > Indeed, the Android guys seemed to be quite excited by cgroup freezing > > > until they thought about the application-classification problem. > > > Seems like it should be easy for some types of applications, but I do > > > admit that apps can have non-trivial and non-obvious dependencies. > > > > This isn't more difficult than deciding which applications will be allowed to > > use wakelocks (in the wakelocks world). It actually seems to be pretty much > > equivalent to me. :-) > > If I understand correctly, the problem they were concerned about was > instead "given that a certain set of apps are permitted to use wakelocks, > which of the other apps can safely be frozen when the display blanks > itself." I _think_ the problem should be reformulated as "which of the other apps can be safely frozen without causing the wakelocks-using ones to have problems" instead (the particular scenario is that one of the wakelocks-using apps may need one of the other apps to process something and therefore the other app cannot be frozen; however, that may be resolved by thawing all of the other apps in such situations IMO). > > > > on the suspend blockers for drivers; the linux device runtime PM is > > > > effectively doing the same things; it allows drivers to suspend/resume > > > > individually (with a very nice API/programming model I should say) based > > > > on usage. And it works on a tree level, so that it's relatively easy > > > > to do things like "I want to go to , but > > > > only if ". This is obviously > > > > an important functionality for all low power devices, ARM or x86. > > > > Suspend blockers had this functionality as part of what it did (they do > > > > more obviously) but I'd wager that the current Linux infrastructure is > > > > outright nicer. > > > > > > This is what Rafael has been working on? > > > > If you mean the runtime PM framework, then yes, I've been working on it. > > > > > Of course, the Android guys also want to pay attention to which apps > > > are running as well as to the state of devices on the system. > > > > In fact the runtime PM framework is also important to Android, because it > > can be used in there, for example, to implement the "early suspend" thing > > I referred to in one of my previous messages in this thread. > > Now we just need to convince the Android guys of that. ;-) I believe there's no need for that, as we were talking about that a few months ago. Thanks, Rafael -- 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/