Re: [update] Re: [PATCH] PM: Make it possible to avoid wakeupevents from being lost

[Florian Mickler]

Hi Rafael!

On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 21:01:53 +0200
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Monday, June 28, 2010, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Mon, 28 Jun 2010, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:

> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: PM: Make it possible to avoid wakeup events from being lost

I have nothing substantial to add, but just wanted to let you know that
this approach seems like a good alternative to me. As far as I can see
the userspace suspend-blocker interface could be expressed in terms of
this kernel facility which brings android closer to mainline.

The only thing I haven't thought through yet is the 'maintain a discrete
set of constraints' vs 'just increment a number' thing. Especially if
what we loose in information through that (in comparison to 'the other
approach') is made up for by easier in-kernel-API.  I _think_ if there
is any need for in-kernel-accounting (i don't know that) it could be
retro-fitted by using the trace event infrastructure?

Cheers,
Flo
--
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/