On Fri, 2010-06-04 at 17:10 -0700, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
Trusted processes are assumed to be sane and idle when there is nothing
for them to do, allowing the machine to go into deep idle states.
Neither the kernel nor our trusted user-space code currently meets
this criteria.
Then both
B1;2005;0cOn Fri, 4 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
2010/6/4 Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de:
Arve,
On Fri, 4 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 5:05 PM, Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de wrote:
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
I kind of agree
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 8:55 AM, Igor Stoppa igor.sto...@nokia.com wrote:
ext Felipe Contreras wrote:
I think this information can be obtained dynamically while the
application is running,
yes, that was the idea
and perhaps the limits can be stored. It would
be pretty difficult for the
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 11:47 PM, Florian Mickler flor...@mickler.org wrote:
On Mon, 31 May 2010 22:12:19 +0200
Florian Mickler flor...@mickler.org wrote:
If I have a simple shell script then I don't wanna jump through
hoops just to please your fragile kernel.
Also why should that code on
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 12:14 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki r...@sisk.pl wrote:
Do you realistically think that by hurting the _user_ you will make the
_developer_ write better code? No, really.
As an application writer, if my users complain that their battery is
being drained (as it happened), they
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 6:28 PM, Peter Zijlstra pet...@infradead.org wrote:
On Thu, 2010-06-03 at 16:12 +0200, Florian Mickler wrote:
On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 09:40:02 +0200
Peter Zijlstra pet...@infradead.org wrote:
Same for firefox, you can teach it to not render animated gifs and run
2010/6/2 Arve Hjønnevåg a...@android.com:
2010/6/2 Peter Zijlstra pet...@infradead.org:
(and please don't mention @#$@ up x86 ACPI again, Intel knows, they're
fixing it, get over it already).
I don't think it is realistic to drop support for all existing hardware.
We are talking about
On Saturday 05 June 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
2010/6/4 Matt Helsley matth...@us.ibm.com:
On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 05:39:17PM -0700, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 5:05 PM, Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de wrote:
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
snip
How do I actually get this to work? Built a kernel with it for my N810, but
there's no ttyO* (I'm using devtmpfs)...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-omap in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at
On Saturday 05 June 2010, Felipe Contreras wrote:
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 11:47 PM, Florian Mickler flor...@mickler.org wrote:
On Mon, 31 May 2010 22:12:19 +0200
Florian Mickler flor...@mickler.org wrote:
If I have a simple shell script then I don't wanna jump through
hoops just to please
On Sat, 2010-06-05 at 21:04 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
I have seen recent proposals that don't require changing the whole
user-space. That might actually be used by other players.
Sure, an approach benefitting more platforms than just Android would be
better,
but saying that the
On Saturday 05 June 2010, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Sat, 2010-06-05 at 21:04 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
I have seen recent proposals that don't require changing the whole
user-space. That might actually be used by other players.
Sure, an approach benefitting more platforms than
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 20:16:33 +0300
Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 12:14 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki r...@sisk.pl wrote:
Do you realistically think that by hurting the _user_ you will make the
_developer_ write better code? No, really.
As an application
On Sat, 2010-06-05 at 21:39 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
There is a number of kernel users that depend on Android user space
(phone vendors using Android on their hardware, but providing their own
drivers), so I don't think we really can identify Android with Google in that
respect.
I
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 10:04 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki r...@sisk.pl wrote:
On Saturday 05 June 2010, Felipe Contreras wrote:
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 11:47 PM, Florian Mickler flor...@mickler.org
wrote:
On Mon, 31 May 2010 22:12:19 +0200
Florian Mickler flor...@mickler.org wrote:
If I have a
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 20:30:40 +0300
Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 6:28 PM, Peter Zijlstra pet...@infradead.org wrote:
On Thu, 2010-06-03 at 16:12 +0200, Florian Mickler wrote:
On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 09:40:02 +0200
Peter Zijlstra pet...@infradead.org
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 10:49 PM, Florian Mickler flor...@mickler.org wrote:
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 20:16:33 +0300
Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
New users will see it has low score; they will not install it. That's
a network effect.
Having users is the quintessential reason
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 20:44:24 +0300
Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/6/2 Arve Hjønnevåg a...@android.com:
2010/6/2 Peter Zijlstra pet...@infradead.org:
(and please don't mention @#$@ up x86 ACPI again, Intel knows, they're
fixing it, get over it already).
I don't
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 11:01 PM, Florian Mickler flor...@mickler.org wrote:
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 20:44:24 +0300
Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/6/2 Arve Hjønnevåg a...@android.com:
2010/6/2 Peter Zijlstra pet...@infradead.org:
(and please don't mention @#$@ up x86
On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 19:16:55 -0700 (PDT)
Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote:
The thing is, unless there is some _really_ deep other reason to do
something like this, I still think it's total overdesign to push any
knowledge/choices like this into the scheduler. I'd rather keep
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 23:06:03 +0300
Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 10:56 PM, Florian Mickler flor...@mickler.org wrote:
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 20:30:40 +0300
Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't think the suspend blockers solve
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 23:26:27 +0300
Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
Supposing there's a perfect usage of suspend blockers from user-space
on current x86 platforms (in theory Android would have that), is the
benefit that big to consider this a strong argument in favor of
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010, Florian Mickler wrote:
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 23:26:27 +0300
Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
Supposing there's a perfect usage of suspend blockers from user-space
on current x86 platforms (in theory Android would have that), is the
benefit that big to
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 9:28 AM, Arjan van de Ven ar...@infradead.org wrote:
On Sat, 05 Jun 2010 11:54:13 +0200
Peter Zijlstra pet...@infradead.org wrote:
On Fri, 2010-06-04 at 17:10 -0700, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
Trusted processes are assumed to be sane and idle when there is
nothing for
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 23:24:40 +0200 (CEST)
Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de wrote:
Stop that advertising campaing already.
Stop advertising that there is no problem.
No thanks,
tglx
Cheers,
Flo
(Sorry, crossfire. Caused
by you answering in the wrong subthread. I know that you
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010, Florian Mickler wrote:
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 23:24:40 +0200 (CEST)
Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de wrote:
Stop that advertising campaing already.
Stop advertising that there is no problem.
No thanks,
tglx
Cheers,
Flo
(Sorry, crossfire. Caused
2010/6/5 Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de:
B1;2005;0cOn Fri, 4 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
2010/6/4 Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de:
Arve,
On Fri, 4 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 5:05 PM, Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de
wrote:
On Sat, 5 Jun
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 22:56:45 +0300
Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 10:49 PM, Florian Mickler flor...@mickler.org wrote:
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 20:16:33 +0300
Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
New users will see it has low score; they
2010/6/5 Rafael J. Wysocki r...@sisk.pl:
On Saturday 05 June 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
2010/6/4 Matt Helsley matth...@us.ibm.com:
On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 05:39:17PM -0700, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 5:05 PM, Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de
wrote:
On Sat, 5 Jun
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
2010/6/5 Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de:
B1;2005;0cOn Fri, 4 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
Why is it a BUG in the trusted app, when I initiate a download and put
the phone down ?
It is not, but we have had bugs where a trusted app
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 14:26:14 -0700
Arve Hjønnevåg a...@android.com wrote:
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 9:28 AM, Arjan van de Ven
ar...@infradead.org wrote:
On Sat, 05 Jun 2010 11:54:13 +0200
Peter Zijlstra pet...@infradead.org wrote:
On Fri, 2010-06-04 at 17:10 -0700, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 3:23 PM, Arjan van de Ven ar...@infradead.org wrote:
We clearly have different standards for what we consider good. We
measure time suspended in minutes or hours, not seconds, and waking up
every second or two causes a noticeable decrease in battery life on
the hardware
2010/6/5 Arjan van de Ven ar...@infradead.org:
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 14:26:14 -0700
Arve Hjønnevåg a...@android.com wrote:
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 9:28 AM, Arjan van de Ven
ar...@infradead.org wrote:
On Sat, 05 Jun 2010 11:54:13 +0200
Peter Zijlstra pet...@infradead.org wrote:
On Fri,
On Saturday 05 June 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
2010/6/5 Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de:
B1;2005;0cOn Fri, 4 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
2010/6/4 Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de:
Arve,
On Fri, 4 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 5:05 PM, Thomas
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 15:26:36 -0700
Brian Swetland swetl...@google.com wrote:
I'm continually surprised by answers like this. We run on hardware
that power gates very aggressively and draws in the neighborhood of
1-2mA at the battery when in the lowest state (3-5mA while the radio
is
On Sunday 06 June 2010, Brian Swetland wrote:
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 3:23 PM, Arjan van de Ven ar...@infradead.org wrote:
We clearly have different standards for what we consider good. We
measure time suspended in minutes or hours, not seconds, and waking up
every second or two causes a
On Sunday 06 June 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
2010/6/5 Rafael J. Wysocki r...@sisk.pl:
On Saturday 05 June 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
2010/6/4 Matt Helsley matth...@us.ibm.com:
On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 05:39:17PM -0700, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 5:05 PM, Thomas
2010/6/5 Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de:
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
2010/6/5 Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de:
B1;2005;0cOn Fri, 4 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
Why is it a BUG in the trusted app, when I initiate a download and put
the phone down ?
It is
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 15:39:44 -0700
Arve Hjønnevåg a...@android.com wrote:
For example if the Adobe Flash player puts a timer every 10
milliseconds (yes it does that), and you give it a 3.99 seconds
range, it will fire its timers every 4 seconds unless other
activity happens
On Sunday 06 June 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
2010/6/5 Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de:
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
2010/6/5 Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de:
B1;2005;0cOn Fri, 4 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
...
So taking your example:
Event happens and gets
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 15:26:36 -0700
Brian Swetland swetl...@google.com wrote:
I'm continually surprised by answers like this. We run on hardware
that power gates very aggressively and draws in the neighborhood of
1-2mA at the battery when in
2010/6/5 Rafael J. Wysocki r...@sisk.pl:
On Saturday 05 June 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
2010/6/5 Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de:
B1;2005;0cOn Fri, 4 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
2010/6/4 Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de:
Arve,
On Fri, 4 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
2010/6/5 Arjan van de Ven ar...@infradead.org:
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 15:39:44 -0700
Arve Hjønnevåg a...@android.com wrote:
For example if the Adobe Flash player puts a timer every 10
milliseconds (yes it does that), and you give it a 3.99 seconds
range, it will fire its timers every 4
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
2010/6/5 Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de:
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
That download might take a minute or two, but that's not an
justification for the crapplication to run unconfined and prevent
lower power states.
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
2010/6/5 Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de:
Well, that's simply an application bug which sucks battery with or
without suspend blockers. So it's unrelated to the freezing of
untrusted apps while a trusted app still works in the background
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
2010/6/5 Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de:
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
2010/6/5 Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de:
B1;2005;0cOn Fri, 4 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
Cross app calls do not go through a central process.
It's
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 3:48 PM, Arjan van de Ven ar...@infradead.org wrote:
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 15:26:36 -0700
Brian Swetland swetl...@google.com wrote:
I'm continually surprised by answers like this. We run on hardware
that power gates very aggressively and draws in the neighborhood of
2010/6/5 Rafael J. Wysocki r...@sisk.pl:
On Sunday 06 June 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
2010/6/5 Rafael J. Wysocki r...@sisk.pl:
On Saturday 05 June 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
2010/6/4 Matt Helsley matth...@us.ibm.com:
On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 05:39:17PM -0700, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
On
2010/6/5 Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de:
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
2010/6/5 Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de:
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
That download might take a minute or two, but that's not an
justification for the crapplication to run
2010/6/5 Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de:
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
2010/6/5 Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de:
Well, that's simply an application bug which sucks battery with or
without suspend blockers. So it's unrelated to the freezing of
untrusted apps while a
2010/6/5 Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de:
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
2010/6/5 Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de:
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
2010/6/5 Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de:
B1;2005;0cOn Fri, 4 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
Cross app calls
On Sat, 5 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
Yes, we can keep all our user space suspend blockers and thaw the
frozen cgroup when any suspend blocker is held, but this would
eliminate any power advantage that freezing a cgroup has over using
suspend to freeze all processes. Without annotating
52 matches
Mail list logo
