On Thu, 2010-05-27 at 16:41 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
quoted text
> On Thu, 2010-05-27 at 15:35 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 04:28:51PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2010-05-27 at 15:06 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > > one way which indicates to the scheduler that tasks in TASK_RUNNING 
> > > > should be scheduled, and when the session is idle we set the flag the 
> > > > other way and all processes in that cgroup get shifted to 
> > > > TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE or something.
> > > 
> > > What's wrong with simply making the phone beep loudly and displaying:
> > > bouncing cows is preventing your phone from sleeping!
> > 
> > Well, primarily that it's possible to design an implementation where it 
> > *doesn't* prevent your phone froms sleeping, but also because a given 
> > application may justifiably be preventing your phone from sleeping for a 
> > short while. What threshold do you use to determine the difference?
> 
> Whatever you want, why would the kernel care?
> 
> You can create a whole resource management layer in userspace, with
> different privilidge/trust levels. Trusted apps may wake more than
> untrusted apps. Who cares.
> 
> The thing is, you can easily detect what keeps your cpu from idling.
> What you do about it a pure userspace solution.
> 
> You can use the QoS stuff to give hints, like don't wake me more than 5
> times a minute, if with those hints an app still doesn't meet whatever
> criteria are suitable for the current mode, yell at it. Or adjust its
> QoS parameters for it.
> 
> Heck, for all I care, simply SIGKILL the thing and report it once the
> user starts looking at his screen again.

Provide incentive for Joe Clicker to improve his app, instead of cope
with the shit he created.
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/