Re: [markgross@thengar.org: [RFC] wake up notifications and suspend blocking (aka more wakelock stuff)]

[NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1405 bytes --]

On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 11:16:23 -0400 (EDT) Alan Stern
<stern@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote:

> On Thu, 13 Oct 2011, NeilBrown wrote:
> 
> > Nope, but I'm keen for you to convince me.  Identify a wakeup event that
> > cannot be made visible to poll (or to user-space by some other
> > mechanism) before the wakeup_source needs to be deactivated.  Or if I've
> > misunderstood what sort of notification is problematic, help me understand.
> 
> Here's an example (just for kicks, not completely relevant to your
> discussion): A USB keyboard key release.  Unlike key presses, key
> releases need not generate input events.  If no processes are
> monitoring the raw keyboard event queue then the release is not visible
> to userspace at all, hence not visible before the wakeup_source needs
> to be deactivated.
> 
> Alan Stern

As you say, not completely relevant.

If a tree falls in a forest with no one to here, does it make a sound?

similarly if an event happens that no-one is looking for, is it visible?
It doesn't really matter.

So at most this is a case of "is not made visible" rather than "cannot be
made visible".

The key-release just needs to clear the "key is pressed" state so that
auto-repeat stops and if it was a modifier, the modification is discarded.
That is all trivially done in some kernel driver while the wakeup_source is
active.

Thanks,
NeilBrown

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --]