Re: [PATCH 01/13] PM: Add wake lock api.

Uli Luckas
2009-02-13T10:55:06Z

On Friday, 13. February 2009, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> I dislike the kernel-side use of wakelocks. They're basically equivalent
> to a device returning -EBUSY during the suspend phase, which is
> something that can be done without any kernel modifications.
That's absouletely wrong. With wake locks, you are in a pre suspend state and
stay there until all wakelocks are released. Then you go to sleep.

With -EBUSY the kernel gives up on suspend until some source triggers it
again. When exactly should suspend then be retried?

Uli

--

------- ROAD ...the handyPC Company - - - ) ) )

Uli Luckas
Head of Software Development

ROAD GmbH
Bennigsenstr. 14 | 12159 Berlin | Germany
fon: +49 (30) 230069 - 62 | fax: +49 (30) 230069 - 69
url: www.road.de

Amtsgericht Charlottenburg: HRB 96688 B
Managing director: Hans-Peter Constien