Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760398Ab0HLQ5o (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:57:44 -0400 Received: from mail-bw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.214.46]:54077 "EHLO mail-bw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753073Ab0HLQ5n convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:57:43 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=PlVO21sr/tXPsfVeaAXWbVmrGTJaEiLDUzWcz9c9i50OTM+gpuPqF3GiVTYNWHEFGh 16mL6wB3o9S/KPFzlsGCxdRRlI5FGE/jXF6k/r8PEKKXKNy6ZpKgsaUAqXi5xITKP46G n+s+AcSEy+FCbfr2yjL7+pR+SyYden4MAgJI4= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20100812140903.GB11362@sirena.org.uk> References: <20100809181638.GI3026@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20100811222854.GJ2516@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20100812010612.GL2516@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20100812034435.GA7403@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20100812140903.GB11362@sirena.org.uk> Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2010 19:57:39 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Attempted summary of suspend-blockers LKML thread, take three From: Felipe Contreras To: Mark Brown Cc: Theodore Tso , paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Alan Cox , 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 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1731 Lines: 37 On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 5:09 PM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 02:11:22PM +0300, Felipe Contreras wrote: > >> So far, nobody has refuted these: >>  1) opportunistic suspend needs a good behaved user-space to work properly >>  2) if suspend blockers are enabled in a system, *all* user-space must >> implement them to work correctly > > For this note that there's a fairly strong expectation that even in a > phone type environment a sane userspace implementation will involve a > very large portion of userspace just totally ignoring suspend blockers. > This means that while it is true that userspace as a whole must have > support for suspend blockers the changes required are substantially less > invasive than you appear to expecting. Correct, but still a considerable amount of changes would need to be done, which _nobody_ has expressed any intention to do. Besides, IMO a good mobile platform would share as much as possible with desktop software. Say, the improvements Nokia has endorsed on the Telepathy IM framework can only help the people already using it on the desktop. However, personally, if I ever have to do './configure --enable-suspend-blockers', I would think that something that just doesn't belong has creped by to user-space. I don't see why there should something particularly different between mobile phones and laptops, and I think this has been already expressed over, and over. -- Felipe Contreras -- 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/