From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751668Ab0ASFP6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jan 2010 00:15:58 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750793Ab0ASFP5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jan 2010 00:15:57 -0500 Received: from atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz ([195.113.26.193]:34882 "EHLO atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932122Ab0ASFP4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jan 2010 00:15:56 -0500 Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 06:15:38 +0100 From: Pavel Machek To: Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Andy Walls , Eric Miao , omegamoon@gmail.com, dbaryshkov@gmail.com, Cyril Hrubis , arminlitzel@web.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dirk@opfer-online.de, Stanislav Brabec , lenz@cs.wisc.edu, rpurdie@rpsys.net, linux-arm-kernel , Bart?omiej Zimo? , zaurus-devel@www.linuxtogo.org, Daniel Borkmann , thommycheck@gmail.com Subject: Re: [suspend/resume] Re: userspace notification from module Message-ID: <20100119051537.GA22153@elf.ucw.cz> References: <686edb2c.6263643a.4b3f4a3b.b60b3@o2.pl> <201001162305.56972.rjw@sisk.pl> <20100116221929.GB8425@elf.ucw.cz> <201001162326.09092.rjw@sisk.pl> <20100117130739.GA2035@ucw.cz> <20100117132618.GA742@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100117132618.GA742@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> X-Warning: Reading this can be dangerous to your mental health. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun 2010-01-17 13:26:18, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 02:07:39PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: > > AFAICT following message would be nice. > > > > 1) battery is critical, userspace please do something > > > > On zaurus and similar, you could add > > > > 2) oh and btw we had power failure so we suspended (or maybe -- so > > hardware suspended itself -- rmk's examples and old apm systems); we > > are now back and running > > > > notification... but... ideally those power failures should never > > happen anyway, so... having this notification is in no way neccessary. > > There's another consideration here: the more complex the emergency > procedure, the higher the chance of _something_ causing it to fail, > and if it does fail, the result is data loss. That's why I propose to only send notification after we resume from emergency suspend :-). > In a properly running system, this isn't something that's going to > get a lot of testing, so there's a higher chance that there will be > bugs, so the simpler the solution, the better. Unfortunately, with old battery in zaurus, I tested it rather a lot. I have new one now, but I can still use old one for testing. Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html