From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S933631Ab0EZInl (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 26 May 2010 04:43:41 -0400
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:41764 "EHLO
	bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S932105Ab0EZInj convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 26 May 2010 04:43:39 -0400
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] PM: Opportunistic suspend support.
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
       Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>,
       Arve =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hj=F8nnev=E5g?= <arve@android.com>,
       Linux-pm mailing list <linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
       Kernel development list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
       Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xenotime.net>,
       Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
       Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
       Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
       Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>,
       Nigel Cunningham <nigel@tuxonice.net>, Ming Lei <tom.leiming@gmail.com>,
       Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
       Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@gmail.com>, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <201005252221.55888.rjw@sisk.pl>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1005251359580.1634-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
	 <201005252147.22358.rjw@sisk.pl>
	 <20100525195300.GA4455@core.coreip.homeip.net>
	 <201005252221.55888.rjw@sisk.pl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 10:43:07 +0200
Message-ID: <1274863387.5882.4855.camel@twins>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3 
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, 2010-05-25 at 22:21 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> 
> Now, we can reject their patches, but that's not going to cause any progress
> to happen, realistically.  Quite on the contrary, Android will continue to use
> wakelocks and Android driver writers will continue to ignore the mainline
> and the gap between the two kernel lines will only get wider and wider over
> time.
> 
> And what really is the drawback if we merge the patches?  Quite frankly,
> I don't see any. 

A funny userspace API of questionable use (esp. with the advent of
better hardware and better runtime PM support) which we will have to
support forever seems like a big enough downside.