From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756592Ab0EXTI1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 May 2010 15:08:27 -0400 Received: from cavan.codon.org.uk ([93.93.128.6]:42395 "EHLO cavan.codon.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752526Ab0EXTI0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 May 2010 15:08:26 -0400 Date: Mon, 24 May 2010 20:08:04 +0100 From: Matthew Garrett To: Pavel Machek Cc: Kevin Hilman , Arve Hj?nnev?g , linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Alan Stern , Tejun Heo , Oleg Nesterov , Paul Walmsley , magnus.damm@gmail.com, mark gross , Arjan van de Ven , Geoff Smith Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 6) Message-ID: <20100524190804.GA21874@srcf.ucam.org> References: <1272667021-21312-1-git-send-email-arve@android.com> <87wrvl5479.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> <20100503215028.GB18910@srcf.ucam.org> <20100524185754.GD1292@ucw.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100524185754.GD1292@ucw.cz> 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 Mon, May 24, 2010 at 08:57:54PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > And btw I do have wakelock-less implementation of autosleep, that only > sleeped the machine when nothing was ready to run. It was called > "sleepy linux". Should I dig it out? As has been explained several times now, that's not equivalent. The difference is what makes this a hard problem. If a usecase is valid and nobody can come up with a convincing explanation of what an elegant solution would look like, then the ugly solution wins. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org