Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756299Ab0HGCFo (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Aug 2010 22:05:44 -0400 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([74.125.121.35]:21326 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751683Ab0HGCFl (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Aug 2010 22:05:41 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to: cc:content-type:x-system-of-record; b=lqq2CbOj378XYPYvhfdxJcRWYYEJtfOdiy5f9TLpTJHv0+NNykwTHANN8fWOmcl13 LYQSoJV4ZuZ7m/p249JqA== MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <20100731175841.GA9367@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20100804195704.GA23681@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20100806225453.GA3947@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2010 19:05:37 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Attempted summary of suspend-blockers LKML thread, take three From: Brian Swetland To: david@lang.hm Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" , linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, arve@android.com, mjg59@srcf.ucam.org, pavel@ucw.cz, florian@mickler.org, rjw@sisk.pl, stern@rowland.harvard.edu, peterz@infradead.org, tglx@linutronix.de, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, menage@google.com, david-b@pacbell.net, James.Bottomley@suse.de, tytso@mit.edu, arjan@infradead.org, swmike@swm.pp.se, galibert@pobox.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-System-Of-Record: true Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1004 Lines: 22 On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 4:59 PM, wrote: > > now, android is betting that the apps are all developed specifically for the > android from scratch, so having a different API is acceptable, even if it > cuts them off from the rest of the *nix applications. For a phone this is > not neccessarily an unreasonable stance, but as Android moves into the > spaces where normal applications are in use (netbooks and tablets), this > becomes a much shakier stance to take. "Normal" apps work reasonably well -- they get halted when the screen turns off, just like they do when my laptop suspends. Wakelocks are useful for mobile-centric apps that you want to keep running in the background, wake up and do work when the device is "asleep", etc. Brian -- 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/