From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Florian Mickler Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8) Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 15:39:48 +0200 Message-ID: <20100526153948.49fc03d1@schatten.dmk.lab> References: <1274863655.5882.4875.camel@twins> <1274867106.5882.5090.camel@twins> <20100526120242.5c9b73ad@schatten.dmk.lab> <20100526133721.602633b2@schatten.dmk.lab> <20100526142430.327ccbc4@schatten.dmk.lab> <20100526122932.GB1990@nokia.com> <20100526143323.7c6f8705@schatten.dmk.lab> <20100526123532.GA2629@nokia.com> <20100526145452.685337db@schatten.dmk.lab> <20100526141942.2a6b94ff@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20100526141942.2a6b94ff@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Alan Cox Cc: felipe.balbi@nokia.com, Vitaly Wool , Peter Zijlstra , LKML , "Paul@smtp1.linux-foundation.org" , Linux OMAP Mailing List , Linux PM List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 26 May 2010 14:19:42 +0100 Alan Cox wrote: > > This is a _big_ plus for attracting 3rd party programs. (And of course > > the thing you don't like). > > You would do better to concentrate on technical issues that the > assignment of malicious intent to other parties. > > Alan This was nothing the kind of! He explicitly said this: On Wed, 26 May 2010 15:29:32 +0300 Felipe Balbi wrote: > What I find ridiculous is the assumption that kernel should provide good > power management even for badly written applications. They should work, > of course, but there's no assumption that the kernel should cope with > those applications and provide good battery usage on those cases. And I responded that if the kernel would do this, then that would be a "_big_ plus for attracting 3d party programs". I had no intent in attacking anyone or putting word's in someones mouth. Sorry if this was unclearly written. Cheers, Flo