From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Garrett Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8) Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 15:02:37 +0100 Message-ID: <20100528140237.GD25798@srcf.ucam.org> References: <20100527230806.4deb6de3@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20100527220949.GB10602@srcf.ucam.org> <20100527232357.6d14fdb2@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20100528101755.7b5f6b8a@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20100528132138.2d802d77@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20100528123110.GA23930@srcf.ucam.org> <20100528145420.1c06e4a3@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from cavan.codon.org.uk ([93.93.128.6]:46241 "EHLO cavan.codon.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753601Ab0E1OC7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 May 2010 10:02:59 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100528145420.1c06e4a3@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Alan Cox Cc: Arve =?iso-8859-1?B?SGr4bm5lduVn?= , Alan Stern , Thomas Gleixner , Peter Zijlstra , LKML , Florian Mickler , felipe.balbi@nokia.com, Linux OMAP Mailing List , Linux PM On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 02:54:20PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > I am not convinced at this point. If the app gets put into the important > group by the driver then you don't need to poke a policy manager. Ok, I think I've misunderstood you. You're actually saying that only applications that are trusted to behave well are allowed to receive wakeup events? Yes, that makes implementation significantly easier. If that maps reasonably well onto the existing Android application space, it may even be an acceptable compromise. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org