From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8) Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 01:50:24 +0200 Message-ID: <201005280150.24873.rjw@sisk.pl> References: <20100527140655.GA28048@srcf.ucam.org> <201005272355.13222.rjw@sisk.pl> <20100527232043.784d5c72@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from ogre.sisk.pl ([217.79.144.158]:50476 "EHLO ogre.sisk.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751644Ab0E0XtI (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 May 2010 19:49:08 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20100527232043.784d5c72@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Alan Cox Cc: Matthew Garrett , Thomas Gleixner , Arve =?iso-8859-1?q?Hj=F8nnev=E5g?= , Florian Mickler , Vitaly Wool , Peter Zijlstra , LKML , Paul@smtp1.linux-foundation.org, felipe.balbi@nokia.com, Linux OMAP Mailing List , Linux PM On Friday 28 May 2010, Alan Cox wrote: > On Thu, 27 May 2010 23:55:13 +0200 > "Rafael J. Wysocki" wrote: > > > On Thursday 27 May 2010, Alan Cox wrote: > > > > > If one works so does the other. > > > > > > > > Not at all. The entire point of opportunistic suspend is that I don't > > > > care is currently in TASK_RUNNABLE or has a timer that's due to expire > > > > in 100msec - based on policy (through not having any held suspend > > > > blockers), I'll go to sleep. That's easily possible on PCs. > > > > > > Yes I appreciate what suspend blockers are trying to do. Now how does > > > that connect with my first sentence ? > > > > I guess what Matthew wanted to say was that you couldn't use ACPI S3 as > > a very deep CPU idle state, because of the way wakeup sources are set up > > for it, while you could use it for aggressive power management with suspend > > blockers as proposed by Arve. > > Which is a nonsense. Because the entire Gnome desktop and KDE, and > OpenOffice and Firefox and friends would need fitting out with > suspend blockers. > > x86 hardware is moving to fix these problems (at least on handheld > devices initially). Look up the C6 power idle, and S0i1 and S0i3 > standby states. I reckon the laptop folks can probably get the hardware > fixed well before anyone can convert the entire PC desktop to include > blockers. To clarify, I'm not suggesting to spread suspend blockers all over the universe. Rafael