From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757465Ab0EGRu6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 May 2010 13:50:58 -0400 Received: from cavan.codon.org.uk ([93.93.128.6]:43838 "EHLO cavan.codon.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756292Ab0EGRuy (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 May 2010 13:50:54 -0400 Date: Fri, 7 May 2010 18:50:25 +0100 From: Matthew Garrett To: Tony Lindgren Cc: Brian Swetland , Alan Stern , mark gross , markgross@thegnar.org, Len Brown , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Kernel development list , Jesse Barnes , Oleg Nesterov , Tejun Heo , Linux-pm mailing list , Wu Fengguang , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 1/8] PM: Add suspend block api. Message-ID: <20100507175025.GA23952@srcf.ucam.org> References: <20100506170956.GA28104@srcf.ucam.org> <20100506171453.GC30928@atomide.com> <20100506172201.GA28578@srcf.ucam.org> <20100506173807.GD30928@atomide.com> <20100506174331.GA29103@srcf.ucam.org> <20100506183335.GE30928@atomide.com> <20100506184418.GA30669@srcf.ucam.org> <20100507020541.GH30928@atomide.com> <20100507171218.GA23142@srcf.ucam.org> <20100507173549.GF387@atomide.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100507173549.GF387@atomide.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: mjg59@cavan.codon.org.uk X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on cavan.codon.org.uk); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, May 07, 2010 at 10:35:49AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Matthew Garrett [100507 10:08]: > > The situation is this. You've frozen most of your userspace because you > > don't trust the applications. One of those applications has an open > > network socket, and policy indicates that receiving a network packet > > should generate a wakeup, allow the userspace application to handle the > > packet and then return to sleep. What mechanism do you use to do that? > > I think the ideal way of doing this would be to have the system running > and hitting some deeper idle states using cpuidle. Then fix the apps > so timers don't wake up the system too often. Then everything would > just run in a normal way. Effective power management in the face of real-world applications is a reasonable usecase. > For the misbehaving stopped apps, maybe they could be woken > to deal with the incoming network data with sysfs_notify? How would that work? Have the kernel send a sysfs_notify on every netwrk packet and have a monitor app listen for it and unfreeze the rest of userspace if it's frozen? That sounds expensive. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org