Re: [PATCH] Input: Add ioctl to block suspend while event queue is not empty.

rafael j. wysocki wrote:
 > On Tuesday, February 14, 2012, NeilBrown wrote:
 > 
 > > (or just keep this stuff out of the kernel and let a user-space daemon make
 > > those decisions).
 > 
 > Which is never going to really work, IMHO.
 > 
 > Realistically, do you know of any distro, vendor, whoever, who tried to
 > actually do that in a released product (or even in a release candidate,
 > or milestone, or whatever different from a prototype running only on one's
 > personal desktop)?  I don't.

well, depending on your decision of "that", there are something like
2.5 million OLPC XO laptops that do it.  do they count?  ;-)

we're still in the middle of converting our 2.6-era home-grown power
management mechanisms to the 3.0-era level, using the
.../power/wakeup[_count] and /sys/power/wakeup_count mechanisms. 
(change comes slowly to shipping products.)  but we do have a
user-level suspend manager.

to the real point of your question:  no, i don't think it does what
you're talking about yet -- i.e., control by applications over whether
suspend should be permitted or not exists, but isn't nearly as
reliable or as foolproof as any of the mechanisms discussed here
recently.

paul
=---------------------
 paul fox, pgf@laptop.org

On Thursday, February 16, 2012, Paul Fox wrote:

rafael j. wysocki wrote:
 > On Tuesday, February 14, 2012, NeilBrown wrote:
 > 
 > > (or just keep this stuff out of the kernel and let a user-space daemon make
 > > those decisions).
 > 
 > Which is never going to really work, IMHO.
 > 
 > Realistically, do you know of any distro, vendor, whoever, who tried to
 > actually do that in a released product (or even in a release candidate,
 > or milestone, or whatever different from a prototype running only on one's
 > personal desktop)?  I don't.

well, depending on your decision of "that", there are something like
2.5 million OLPC XO laptops that do it.  do they count?  ;-)

we're still in the middle of converting our 2.6-era home-grown power
management mechanisms to the 3.0-era level, using the
.../power/wakeup[_count] and /sys/power/wakeup_count mechanisms. 
(change comes slowly to shipping products.)  but we do have a
user-level suspend manager.

to the real point of your question:  no, i don't think it does what
you're talking about yet -- i.e., control by applications over whether
suspend should be permitted or not exists, but isn't nearly as
reliable or as foolproof as any of the mechanisms discussed here
recently.

OK, cool!

I was wrong then, but good to hear that. :-)

Thanks,
Rafael