Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758669Ab0HLBGa (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Aug 2010 21:06:30 -0400 Received: from e6.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.146]:46766 "EHLO e6.ny.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757571Ab0HLBG2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Aug 2010 21:06:28 -0400 Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2010 18:06:12 -0700 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Felipe Contreras Cc: Alan Cox , "Ted Ts'o" , david@lang.hm, Brian Swetland , 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, menage@google.com, david-b@pacbell.net, James.Bottomley@suse.de, arjan@infradead.org, swmike@swm.pp.se, galibert@pobox.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com Subject: Re: Attempted summary of suspend-blockers LKML thread, take three Message-ID: <20100812010612.GL2516@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <20100807061558.GA28087@thunk.org> <20100808155719.GB3635@thunk.org> <20100808213821.GD3635@thunk.org> <20100809112453.77210acc@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20100809181638.GI3026@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20100811222854.GJ2516@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2181 Lines: 43 On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 03:28:00AM +0300, Felipe Contreras wrote: > On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 1:28 AM, Paul E. McKenney > wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 10:18:51PM +0300, Felipe Contreras wrote: > >> On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 9:16 PM, Paul E. McKenney > >> wrote: > >> > But wouldn't an office suite run as a power-oblivious application on an > >> > Android device? ?After all, office applications do not need to run when > >> > the screen is turned off, so these the applications do not need to use > >> > suspend blockers. > >> > >> Ideally the system would be suspended even when the screen is on. If > >> there are no "trusted" applications running at the same time, then > >> openoffice wouldn't load at all. Right? > > > > My understanding is that Android systems in fact do not suspend when > > the screen is on, and that most (perhaps all) other systems do not > > opportunistically suspend at all. ?There has been some speculation about > > what a hypothetical Android having a non-volatile display might do, > > but as far as I know, this is just speculation. > > I have a desktop system in mind. If opportunistic suspend is only > triggered when the display is off, then it's no good for normal usage, > and therefore dynamic PC needs to get its act together... specially > for laptops. If I understand you correctly, you are saying that both opportunistic suspend and dynamic power control should be used together, with dynamic power control being used for short non-busy periods (as in between keystrokes) and opportunistic suspend being used for longer non-busy periods (as in while grabbing a coffee). That combination of usage sounds promising to me. That said, I don't know that anyone has really sat down and thought through how one might apply suspend blockers to a desktop system. I suspect that there are several ways to go about it. Thanx, Paul -- 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/