Re: [RFC][PATCH] PM: Avoid losing wakeup events during suspend

4 messages, 3 authors, 2010-06-21 · open the first message on its own page

Re: [RFC][PATCH] PM: Avoid losing wakeup events during suspend

From: Alan Cox <hidden>
Date: 2010-06-21 12:20:14

There's been one proposal that we simply merge in a set of no-op
inline functions for suspend blockers, just so we can get let the
drivers go in (assuming that Greg K-H believes this is still a
problem), but with an automatical removal of N months (N to be
decided, say 9 or 12 or 18 months).
If you automatically remove the suspend blocker wrappers in 12 months
then you can keep the drivers in tree.

The drivers are generally not a problem (ok some of them like the binder
are interesting little trips) its just those hooks, and we'd all benefit
somewhat even if the only bit google are patching back in are their hooks.
down the road for N months.  Another approach is to simply merge in
no-op functions and not leave any kind of deprecation schedule.
That's sort of an implicit admission of the fact that we may not reach
consensus on this issue.  Or we could simply ship the patches as-is to
Very bad precedent. What happens when every other vendor does the same ?
Keep the upstream code clean. 
Linus after he gets back from vacation and ask him for a thumbs up or
thumbs down vote, which might settle things once and for all.
You seem desperate to just throw it at Linus - you have been all along
before the discussion, during it and now: but I don't understand why ?
It's as if you don't want progress to be made by other means ?
How do we go forward from here?
PM QoS seems to be evolving nicely.

As for merging stuff - if its new code then it should get submitted with
the hooks left out anyway, just as all the other vendors are doing with
weird little custom hooks of their own. The hooks can still easily be
patched back in as a tiny easy to maintain vendor patch.

This works - the code still gets updated and seen by people, only the
little hook patch has to be maintained and generally it looks after
itself except for the odd .rej when something changes right up by the
merge point.

Alan

Re: [RFC][PATCH] PM: Avoid losing wakeup events during suspend

From: Florian Mickler <hidden>
Date: 2010-06-21 12:26:58

On Mon, 21 Jun 2010 13:22:34 +0100
Alan Cox [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
How do we go forward from here?
PM QoS seems to be evolving nicely.
Still, it doesn't solve the userspace-part.

Cheers,
Flo

Re: [RFC][PATCH] PM: Avoid losing wakeup events during suspend

From: Florian Mickler <hidden>
Date: 2010-06-21 12:26:58

On Mon, 21 Jun 2010 13:22:34 +0100
Alan Cox [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
How do we go forward from here?
PM QoS seems to be evolving nicely.
Still, it doesn't solve the userspace-part.

Cheers,
Flo

Re: [RFC][PATCH] PM: Avoid losing wakeup events during suspend

From: tytso@mit.edu
Date: 2010-06-21 13:42:49

On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 01:22:34PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
You seem desperate to just throw it at Linus - you have been all along
before the discussion, during it and now: but I don't understand why ?
Why are you so afraid to let Linus make the call?  He's the benevolent
dictator, isn't he?
It's as if you don't want progress to be made by other means ?
It doesn't look like progress is being made here.

   	   	     	      	       	    - Ted
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help