From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Florian Mickler Subject: Re: [linux-pm] suspend blockers & Android integration Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2010 12:46:01 +0200 Message-ID: <20100606124601.2f1f6714@schatten.dmk.lab> References: <20100603193045.GA7188@elte.hu> <20100603231153.GA11302@elte.hu> <20100603232302.GA16184@elte.hu> <20100604071354.GA14451@elte.hu> <20100604083423.GD15181@elte.hu> <1275653210.27810.39762.camel@twins> <1275731653.27810.41078.camel@twins> <20100605092851.6ee15f13@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from ist.d-labs.de ([213.239.218.44]:43987 "EHLO mx01.d-labs.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753652Ab0FFKqU (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Jun 2010 06:46:20 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Vitaly Wool Cc: Brian Swetland , Arve =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Hj=F8nnev?= =?ISO-8859-15?Q?=E5g?= , Arjan van de Ven , tytso@mit.edu, Peter Zijlstra , "H. Peter Anvin" , LKML , Neil Brown , James Bottomley , Alan Cox , Linux PM , Ingo Molnar , Linux OMAP Mailing List , Linus Torvalds , Thomas Gleixner , Felipe Balbi On Sun, 6 Jun 2010 12:00:47 +0200 Vitaly Wool wrote: > Even worse, the suspend wakelock will keep the > whole kernel active, as opposed to powering off unused devices > separately as it's done in runtime PM. That is not true. While the kernel is not suspended it does runtime pm. > > Users do like that to work too -- I recall Arve leaving a device in > > his filing cabinet with the radio off while he was out of the country > > for three weeks once, and him discovering it was still running with > > something like 25% battery remaining when he returned. > > So what you're actually up to is that a user should restart the phone > and turn the radio off if he wants to find it running when he's back > from a long business trip or something. Nice... ? Cheers, Flo