Re: [markgross@thengar.org: Re: [RFC] wake up notifications andsuspend blocking (aka more wakelock stuff)]

[Alan Cox]

On Sun, 2 Oct 2011 09:48:49 -0700
mark gross <markgross@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Forwarding to bigger group for discussion.

Looks clean enough - only question I have is do we need a separate
'suspend block' or can latency do it -suspend is a very very high latency
event. I guess the suspend block is clearer in intent than abusing latency
but I do wonder if the actual suspend path should also check latency
constraints too. If I've asked for 5mS latency then suspend is a wrong
choice!

Alan
--
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/