Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8)
mark gross <640e9920 <at> gmail.com>
2010-05-31 23:26:17 GMT
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 11:38:55PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday 31 May 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
> > 2010/5/29 Alan Stern <stern <at> rowland.harvard.edu>:
> > > On Sat, 29 May 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
> > >
> > >> > In place of in-kernel suspend blockers, there will be a new type of QoS
> > >> > constraint -- call it QOS_EVENTUALLY. It's a very weak constraint,
> > >> > compatible with all cpuidle modes in which runnable threads are allowed
> > >> > to run (which is all of them), but not compatible with suspend.
> > >> >
> > >> This sound just like another API rename. It will work, but given that
> > >> suspend blockers was the name least objectionable last time around,
> > >> I'm not sure what this would solve.
> > >
> > > It's not just a rename. By changing this into a QoS constraint, we
> > > make it more generally useful. Instead of standing on its own, it
> > > becomes part of the PM-QOS framework.
> > >
> > We cannot use the existing pm-qos framework. It is not safe to call
> > from atomic context.
> We've just merged a patch that fixed that if I'm not mistaken. Mark, did your
> PM QoS update fix that?
I'm pretty sure it can be called in atomic context, and if its not I'm
sure we can fix that. It can be called in atomic context. I don't
think it was ever a problem to call it in atomic context. The problem it
had was that crappy list of string compares. Thats been fixed.