From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8)
Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 09:29:57 +0200
Message-ID: <1275031797.32462.18.camel@laptop>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1005271344040.3239-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
	 <20100527181433.GG3543@srcf.ucam.org>
	 <20100527200313.5c532f2f@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
	 <201005280110.17075.rjw@sisk.pl>
	 <20100528005045.6ea5feba@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20100528005045.6ea5feba@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>, Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Paul@smtp1.linux-foundation.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Florian Mickler <florian@mickler.org>, Linux OMAP Mailing List <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>, Linux PM <linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org>
List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, 2010-05-28 at 00:50 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> Today "idle" means "no task running"
> 
> If you are prepared to rephrase that as "no task that matters is running"
> what would need to answer ?

I'm not sure we need or want to go there.

Why not simply let upatedb block on its IO because its QoS policy tells
us that its IO priority is idle. Therefore it will not avoid the IO
device from going idle and indefinitely delaying servicing requests.

When updatedb blocks, the runqueue becomes empty and we gain goodness.

Or are we talking about the same thing?