Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758560Ab2BNALa (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Feb 2012 19:11:30 -0500 Received: from mail-qy0-f174.google.com ([209.85.216.174]:54152 "EHLO mail-qy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752962Ab2BNALZ convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Feb 2012 19:11:25 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <201202122232.12541.rjw@sisk.pl> References: <201202070200.55505.rjw@sisk.pl> <201202100144.11123.rjw@sisk.pl> <20120212020507.GD18742@gs62> <201202122232.12541.rjw@sisk.pl> Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 16:11:24 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/8] PM: Implement autosleep and "wake locks" From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arve_Hj=F8nnev=E5g?= To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: markgross@thegnar.org, NeilBrown , Linux PM list , LKML , Magnus Damm , Matthew Garrett , Greg KH , John Stultz , Brian Swetland , Alan Stern Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1895 Lines: 39 On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 1:32 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Sunday, February 12, 2012, mark gross wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 01:44:10AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > [...] >> > I'd like us and Android to use the same low-level data structures for power >> > management and the same API eventually, at least for drivers. ?This is not >> > the case at the moment and it's actively hurting us as a project quite a bit. >> > If Android needs to add patches on top of whatever we have to get the desired >> > functionality, I'm fine with that, as long as they don't require drivers to use >> > APIs that are incompatible with the mainline. ?Insisting that Android should >> > use a user-space-based autosleep implementation wouldn't help at all, because >> > realistically this isn't going to happen. >> >> why not? ?I don't think having the PMS explicitly acknowledge a wake >> event is a big ask at all. > > I'd like to hear what the Android people think about that, but somehow it seems > to me they won't like it. :-) > Correct. The android power manager service does not handle wake events and therefore does not know when it is safe to acknowledge a wake event (assuming this acknowledgement re-triggers suspend). Other components handle the event and only notify the power manager if the event should change a state (e.g. turn the screen on). Some wake events, like the alarm used for battery monitoring, don't signal user space at all if the user visible state did not change. Other wake events are processed by lower level user-space services than the system-server where the power manager runs. -- Arve Hj?nnev?g -- 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/