From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: tytso@mit.edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 6)
Date: Sun, 30 May 2010 08:21:43 -0400
Message-ID: <20100530122143.GA6405@thunk.org>
References: <1272667021-21312-1-git-send-email-arve@android.com>
	<87wrvl5479.fsf@deeprootsystems.com>
	<20100503215028.GB18910@srcf.ucam.org>
	<alpine.DEB.2.00.1005141408260.3348@utopia.booyaka.com>
	<20100514203202.GA12409@srcf.ucam.org>
	<87aas2azc5.fsf@deeprootsystems.com>
	<20100514231510.GG16989@thunk.org>
	<87r5laa4oc.fsf@deeprootsystems.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87r5laa4oc.fsf@deeprootsystems.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm>,
	<mailto:linux-pm-request@lists.linux-foundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/linux-pm>
List-Post: <mailto:linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linux-pm-request@lists.linux-foundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm>,
	<mailto:linux-pm-request@lists.linux-foundation.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org
Errors-To: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org
To: Kevin Hilman <khilman@deeprootsystems.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>, Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>, Matthew Garrett <mjg@redhat.com>, Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>, Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>, Liam Girdwood <lrg@slimlogic.co.uk>, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@stericsson.com>, Daniel Walker <dwalker@codeaurora.org>, Brian Swetland <swetland@google.com>, Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>, Geoff Smith <geoffx.smith@intel.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 09:12:03AM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> 
> The n900 *never* suspends.  It only uses dynamic PM + CPUidle.
> The droid uses opportunistic suspend (as well as dynamic PM + CPUidle)
> 
> I don't know of any more objective comparison of the two, but as a
> user of both devices I can say that the active usage is basically the
> same (around a day) and the idle use is similar as well, even though
> the Droid has a slightly bigger battery (1400 mAh vs. 1320 mAh.)....

Just for a bit of light amusement, although hopefully we've killed the
meme that other platforms have absolutely no problems in this area
without using something like suspend blockers, I offer for your
consideration this thread from maemo-developers:

http://lists.maemo.org/pipermail/maemo-developers/2010-May/026490.html

Note how users conflate battery lifetime after downloading a random
application with the platform being "stable".  I also was amazed that
the thread degenerated into trying to detect processes that are taking
90% of the CPU.  It's not necessary for a process to be constantly
running before it starts chewing up your battery, and if people think
the "blame the victim" trick works (``It's the user's fault for
"approving" the application by installing it!''), I suspect that
the platform will be not be very successful...

							- Ted