Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/2] PM / Sleep: Extended control of suspend/hibernateinterfaces

[Alan Stern]

On Mon, 17 Oct 2011, NeilBrown wrote:

> .... Actually, the more I think about it, the more sense it makes to include
> the wake-up-at-time service with the suspend-daemon.  Then the RTC alarm
> doesn't need a wakeup_source.
> So my hypothetical suspend-daemon provides 2 services:
>  1/ Client can say "Don't suspend after X".  If X is in the past it means
>     don't suspend at all. In the future it means "If you suspend before
>     this, be sure to wake up by X".  This request must be explicitly
>     cancelled (though some mechanism is needed so that if the process dies
>     it is automatically cancelled).
>  2/ Client can say "check with me before entering suspend".  Client needs to
>     respond to any callback promptly, but can register a "don't suspend after
>     now" request first.
>     (Client probably gets a callback both on suspend and resume)

1/ can be a separate type of communication channel to the daemon.  The
client opens a connection and sends the time X.  It then blocks waiting
for a response.  The daemon waits until X (using RTC wakeup alarms as
necessary), then acknowledges the request and prevents further suspends
until the connection is closed.

2/ is the normal client communication mechanism that I described 
earlier.  I don't see why a callback would be needed during resume in 
general, although some clients might want to be informed.

Alan Stern

--
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/