Re: Attempted summary of suspend-blockers LKML thread, take three

Matthew Garrett
2010-08-10T18:13:20Z

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:07:20AM -0700, david@lang.hm wrote:

> If the primary difference between sleep and suspend is not scheduling
> processes, instead of messing with oppurtinistic suspend/suspend
> blockers/wakelocks/etc, why not just 'temporarily' change the timer fuzz
> value to a very large value (say an hour). That would still let things
> like openoffice saves ahve a fair chance to trigger before the battery
> died completely, but would wake the system so infrequently that it will
> be effectivly the same as a full suspend.

Because it only affects processes that sleep. It's a question of how
much pathology you want to be able to tolerate.

--
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org