From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755665AbZBTWAo (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Feb 2009 17:00:44 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753911AbZBTWAg (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Feb 2009 17:00:36 -0500 Received: from smtp-out003.kontent.com ([81.88.40.217]:46520 "EHLO smtp-out003.kontent.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753857AbZBTWAg (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Feb 2009 17:00:36 -0500 From: Oliver Neukum To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: [RFD] Automatic suspend Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 23:05:05 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.10.3 (Linux/2.6.27.7-9-default; KDE/4.1.3; x86_64; ; ) Cc: Alan Stern , Arve =?iso-8859-1?q?Hj=F8nnev=E5g?= , "Woodruff, Richard" , Arjan van de Ven , Kyle Moffett , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , pm list , LKML , Pavel Machek , Nigel Cunningham , Matthew Garrett , mark gross , Uli Luckas , Igor Stoppa , Brian Swetland , Len Brown References: <200902192358.13068.oliver@neukum.org> <200902201146.59944.rjw@sisk.pl> In-Reply-To: <200902201146.59944.rjw@sisk.pl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200902202305.09992.oliver@neukum.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Am Freitag 20 Februar 2009 11:46:55 schrieb Rafael J. Wysocki: > On Thursday 19 February 2009, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > Am Donnerstag 19 Februar 2009 23:21:46 schrieb Rafael J. Wysocki: > > > > That's the whole point behind userspace wakelocks! They provide a > > > > mechanism for userspace to tell the kernel when (as far as userspace > > > > is > > > > > > concerned) it is or is not okay to auto-sleep. > > > > > > Still, one can go further and observe that the user space can in fact > > > start automatic suspend by itself whenever it knows it's appropriate > > > ... > > > > User space initiating this is a race condition. > > Do you mean a race with the other user space processes or with the kernel? With the set of runnable processes.There's always a window between evaluating the current set of runnable tasks and telling the kernel to sleep. IMO the most elegant solution would be a task attribute that would signal the kernel that a task should not count as keeping the system busy even if it is runnable and trigger the sleep in kernel space. Regards Oliver