Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8)

[Alan Cox]

On Fri, 28 May 2010 14:30:36 +0200
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Fri, 2010-05-28 at 13:21 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > [Total kernel changes
> > 
> >         Ability to mark/unmark a scheduler control group as outside of
> >         some parts of idle consideration. Generically useful and
> >         localised. Group latency will do most jobs fine (Zygo is correct
> >         it can't solve his backup case elegantly I think)
> > 
> >         Test in the idling logic to distinguish the case and only needed
> >         for a single Android specific power module. Generically useful
> >         and localised] 
> 
> I really don't like this..
> 
> Why can't we go with the previously suggested: make bad apps block on
> QoS resources or send SIGXCPU, SIGSTOP, SIGTERM and eventually SIGKILL

Ok. Are you happy with the QoS being attached to a scheduler control
group and the use of them to figure out what is what ?
--
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/