Re: [PATCH 02/11] PM: extend PM QoS with per-device wake-up constraints

On Thu, Aug 04, 2011 at 09:15:30PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:

On Thursday, August 04, 2011, Mark Brown wrote:

quoted

On the one hand that's true.  On the other hand that just seems like
going down a bad road where we have drivers that only work when run with
a magic userspace that may or may not be published which is just going

First off, we're doing this already (user space can block runtime PM, for
one example, because there are systems where runtime PM doesn't work
although it works on other systems with analogous hardware and pretty
much the same set of drivers).

Yeah, I've never been terribly convinced about that and for the things
that drivers need to manualy implement (like wake configuration) it's
widely ignored.

Second, I think there are valid use cases in which user space _really_ knows
better than the kernel.  I'm opposed to the idea that users shouldn't be given
control of their systems, because they may not know what they're doing.

Do you have any examples of this that aren't better expressed in device
specific terms?  It's not that users don't know what they're doing, it's
that working around system integration and stability issues in userspace
isn't really progressing things well or helping with maintainability.
Generally if the user has sufficient access to be able to do anything
with this stuff they've got just as much access to the kernel as to
userspace.