Re: [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 6)

[Tony Lindgren]

* Matthew Garrett <mjg@xxxxxxxxxx> [100511 09:10]:
> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 09:12:28AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> 
> > To me it sounds like this should only be allowed to happen when you do:
> > 
> > # echo 1 > /sys/power/suspend_while_idle
> > 
> > As it kills the timers and leads to non-standard behaviour of the apps
> > as they won't run :)
> > 
> > And then the remaining question is how to make sure the use cases
> > below can be handled in a clean way.
> 
> That's handled by the /sys/power/policy opportunistic/forced switch.

OK, so can the suspend blocker then become just:

# Block suspend while idle, system stays running
# echo default > /sys/power/policy

and the when it's OK to suspend:

# Allow suspend while idle, system suspends when it hits kernel idle loop
# echo opportunistic > /sys/power/policy

or do you still need something more to ensure the data gets into your
app and be handled?

The part I really don't like is the idea of patching all over the drivers
and userspace for the wakelocks/suspendblocks.

Regards,

Tony
--
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/