Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/3] PM / Core: suspend_again callback for device PM.

["Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>]

On Tuesday, April 26, 2011, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > > To conclude, I'm not sure about the approach.  In particular, I'm not sure
> > > if the benefit is worth the effort and the resulting complications (ie. the
> > > possibility of having to deal with wakeup signals not requested by user
> > > space) seem to be a bit too far reaching.
> > > 
> > > Greg, what do you think?
> > 
> > I agree with you in that I don't think that this type of feature is
> > valid at the moment.
> 
> Our current "solution" is low level suspend code on Zaurus directly
> looking at charger state and doing the "wakeup or not" decision by hand. 
> 
> > I don't understand why our current situation doesn't work, what are we
> > lacking that is needed for these systems that we have not seen
> > before?
> 
> It works, but it is ugly; and it seems samsung now needs similar
> hacks.
> 
> > What is the root problem that this is trying to solve?
> 
> It is trying to fix machines that need to run periodic kernel tasks
> even when user asked them to sleep. Zaurus needs to periodicaly wake
> up to be able to charge battery in s2ram state, for example.

Well, if you wake up periodically, it's not S2RAM any more, I'd say.

Thanks,
Rafael