From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Garrett Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 6) Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 22:34:37 +0100 Message-ID: <20100517213437.GA2395@srcf.ucam.org> References: <87wrvl5479.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> <20100503215028.GB18910@srcf.ucam.org> <20100514203202.GA12409@srcf.ucam.org> <87aas2azc5.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> <20100514231510.GG16989@thunk.org> <87r5laa4oc.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> <20100517193440.GA32066@srcf.ucam.org> <87ljbi1anb.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87ljbi1anb.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Kevin Hilman Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , Jesse Barnes , Oleg Nesterov , linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, Liam Girdwood , Len Brown , Jacob Pan , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, Linus Walleij , Daniel Walker , tytso@mit.edu, Geoff Smith , Brian Swetland , Mark Brown , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Tejun Heo , Andrew Morton , Wu Fengguang , Arjan van de Ven List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 02:27:52PM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: > Matthew Garrett writes: > > Run this (or equivalent code) on an N900 and on an Android. Measure the > > screen-off power draw on both. > > > > int main() { > > int i; > > while (1) > > i++; > > return 0; > > } > > This kind of rogue app will also kill my CPU performance. For rogue > CPU-hog apps, we use _tools_ to find and fix this kind of problem: > top, renice, kill, etc. that use features of the scheduler to find > and/or solve the problem. If my phone is able to avoid losing almost all of its standby time without me having to care about whether my bouncing cow game was written by a complete fool or not, that means that my phone is *better* than one where I have to care. Would the world be better if said fool could be sent to reeducation camps before being allowed to write any more software? Probably, but sadly that doesn't seem to be something we can implement through code. I'd love it if we could assume that all software is going to be perfect, but in the absence of that ideal world there's a strong incentive to develop technology that does its best to cope with adverse situations. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org