Re: [RFC][PATCH 00/11] Android PM extensions (version 3)

[Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>]

Hi!

> > earlysuspend is an ugly hack and wakelock is very wrong name at the
> > very least... as seen in previous discussion. Can we get that fixed?
> 
> I don't have a fix for earlysuspend, but it is far less important than
> wakelocks, so I can drop it from the patch series if that is
> preferred.
> 
> Regarding the name, I don't agree with your statement that wakelock is
> a very wrong name. Like I said before, you can view it as a
> reader/writer lock where the readers protect the wake state of the
> system. That said, if there is a better name that more than one person
> can agree on, I can rename the api. Here is a list of suggestions I
> have seen so far along with the api I think they dictate if the
> existing functionality is to be preserved:


> suspend_inhibitor: (from inhibit_suspend)
> - api: suspend_inhibitor_init, suspend_inhibitor_destroy,
> suspend_inhibit, suspend_inhibit_timeout, suspend_uninhibit
> - pros: The effect is more obvious than *_lock.
> - cons: Does not match android user space api (but less confusing than
> suspend/sleep_lock).

I like this one, as does rafael, so :-).

I thought you are switching to /dev based api anyway so rename should
not be a problem?
								Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html