From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756860Ab0EZQ2j (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 May 2010 12:28:39 -0400 Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:41490 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752952Ab0EZQ2h (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 May 2010 12:28:37 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] PM: Opportunistic suspend support. From: Peter Zijlstra To: James Bottomley Cc: Pekka Enberg , Arve =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hj=F8nnev=E5g?= , Florian Mickler , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Alan Stern , Dmitry Torokhov , Linux-pm mailing list , Kernel development list , Len Brown , Pavel Machek , Randy Dunlap , Andrew Morton , Andi Kleen , Cornelia Huck , Tejun Heo , Jesse Barnes , Nigel Cunningham , Ming Lei , Wu Fengguang , Maxim Levitsky , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Matthew Garrett , Greg KH , tytso@mit.edu In-Reply-To: <1274890736.4467.574.camel@mulgrave.site> References: <201005252344.37639.rjw@sisk.pl> <1274863342.5882.4850.camel@twins> <20100526112303.3fef15a4@schatten.dmk.lab> <1274866402.5882.5051.camel@twins> <1274868384.5882.5169.camel@twins> <1274869262.5882.5222.camel@twins> <1274890736.4467.574.camel@mulgrave.site> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 18:28:28 +0200 Message-ID: <1274891308.1674.1766.camel@laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2010-05-26 at 11:18 -0500, James Bottomley wrote: > > Or make the suspend manager a C proglet and provide a JNI interface, > > or whatever. > > It's a fairly large piece of code to try to rewrite in C, so I don't > think that's feasible on a reasonable timescale. Android does have the > concept of special sockets that can be used to communicate from less to > more privileged processes (it has a very segmented runtime model), so > these might be usable ... they have a drawback that they're essentially > named pipes, so no multiplexing, but one per suspend influencing C > process shouldn't be a huge burden. It wouldn't need to convert the whole Frameworks layer into C, just enough to manage the suspend state. Anyway, I think there's been enough arguments against even the concept of opportunistic/auto-suspend, and I for one will object with a NAK if Rafael send this to Linus. The whole idea of segregating userspace like that, and not letting runnable thing run is very ill considered indeed.