Re: Attempted summary of suspend-blockers LKML thread
From: Arjan van de Ven
Date: Sun Aug 01 2010 - 19:12:19 EST
On Mon, 2 Aug 2010 01:02:24 +0200
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Generally speaking, you can divide applications into the ones that
> will be allowed to influence ths system's behavior with respect to
> power management and the others that won't be allowed to do it. The
> latter may be forcibly "frozen" (this way or another) when the
> "trused" ones collectively decide it's a good idea to enter a deeper
> "energy saving" state. However, it is not a given that specific
> applications will always be in the same group. They may be "trusted"
> on some systems and they may not be "trusted" on some other system,
> depending on the configuration etc. That even may change over time
> on the same system.
it might even be a sliding scale; the voting rights don't have to be
"0" and "1", but could also be "0.2" and such....
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/