From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8) Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 19:37:51 +0200 Message-ID: <1274981871.27810.5650.camel@twins> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Alan Stern Cc: Matthew Garrett , LKML , Florian Mickler , Linux PM , Thomas Gleixner , Linux OMAP Mailing List , felipe.balbi@nokia.com, Alan Cox List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2010-05-27 at 13:32 -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > On some platforms (like those with ACPI), deeper power-savings are > available by using forced suspend than by using idle. Sounds like something that's fixable, doesn't it? > That used to be > the case on Android. Arve has said that it isn't necessarily true any > more, but that's the way their software is set up. Who cares about their current software? We're arguing about sensible interfaces for the technical problem posed.