From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758804Ab0EMV0Y (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 May 2010 17:26:24 -0400 Received: from mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org ([204.13.248.72]:57122 "EHLO mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758673Ab0EMV0U (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 May 2010 17:26:20 -0400 X-Mail-Handler: MailHop Outbound by DynDNS X-Originating-IP: 69.181.193.102 X-Report-Abuse-To: abuse@dyndns.com (see http://www.dyndns.com/services/mailhop/outbound_abuse.html for abuse reporting information) X-MHO-User: U2FsdGVkX1+H8pflgl0fXpLxbm5Vi4Io Date: Thu, 13 May 2010 14:25:56 -0700 From: Tony Lindgren To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Matthew Garrett , Alan Stern , Paul Walmsley , Arve =?utf-8?B?SGrDuG5uZXbDpWc=?= , Linux-pm mailing list , Kernel development list , Tejun Heo , Oleg Nesterov , Kevin Hilman , magnus.damm@gmail.com, "Theodore Ts'o" , mark gross , Arjan van de Ven , Geoff Smith , Brian Swetland , =?utf-8?Q?Beno=C3=AEt?= Cousson , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, Vitaly Wool , Mark Brown , Liam Girdwood Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 6) Message-ID: <20100513212556.GI3428@atomide.com> References: <20100513202320.GF3428@atomide.com> <20100513203412.GA21244@srcf.ucam.org> <201005132321.59245.rjw@sisk.pl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201005132321.59245.rjw@sisk.pl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Rafael J. Wysocki [100513 14:16]: > On Thursday 13 May 2010, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 01:23:20PM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > * Matthew Garrett [100513 13:03]: > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 01:00:04PM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > > > > > > > The system stays running because there's something to do. The system > > > > > won't suspend until all the processors hit the kernel idle loop and > > > > > the next_timer_interrupt_critical() returns nothing. > > > > > > > > At which point an application in a busy loop cripples you. > > > > > > Maybe you could deal with the misbehaving untrusted apps in the userspace > > > by sending kill -STOP to them when the screen blanks? Then continue > > > when some event wakes up the system again. > > > > And if that's the application that's listening to the network socket > > that you want to get a wakeup event from? This problem is hard. I'd love > > there to be an elegant solution based on using the scheduler, but I > > really don't know what it is. > > I agree and I don't understand the problem that people have with the > opportunistic suspend feature. It seems to be picking quite a few comments for one. > It solves a practical issue that _at_ _the_ _moment_ cannot be solved > differently, while there's a growing number of out-of-tree drivers depending > on this framework. We need those drivers in and because we don't have any > viable alternative at hand, we have no good reason to reject it. Nothing is preventing merging the drivers can be merged without these calls. Regards, Tony