Re: [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8)

Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-06-05T19:39:31Z

On Saturday 05 June 2010, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-06-05 at 21:04 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >
> > > I have seen recent proposals that don't require changing the whole
> > > user-space. That might actually be used by other players.
> >
> > Sure, an approach benefitting more platforms than just Android would be better,
> > but saying that the kernel shouldn't address the Android's specific needs as a
> > rule if no one else has those needs too is quite too far reaching to me.
>
> Well, if the android people keep rejecting all sensible approaches to
> power savings except their suspend blocker mess, then I don't see why we
> should support their ill designed mess.

Well, I certainly would like the Android people to be more appreciative of our
ideas if they expect reciprocity.

> We should strive to provide an interface that can be used by all
> interested parties to conserve power; if Android really is the only
> possible user of the interface then I don't see any reason at all to
> merge it, they might as well keep it in their private tree.

There is a number of kernel users that depend on Android user space
(phone vendors using Android on their hardware, but providing their own
drivers), so I don't think we really can identify Android with Google in that
respect.

Rafael