[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: process wakeups



Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 02:57:56PM -0700, Ulrich Drepper wrote:

I would hope the package maintainers can find some time and look at the
issues.  Maybe at least document them in a BZ.  I might try to do the
latter myself but given the large number of packages involved I'll most
likely be able to cover just a few packages.  IMO it should be a release
criteria that a program does use polling.

There are certain situations where polling is inevitable (such as querying hardware for battery status or signal strength, pulling mail, that kind of thing). Applications that do this should do it at relatively low frequency, and where possible (ie, almost always) use g_timeout_add_seconds or equivalent functionality. It's pretty inevitable that we'll have one wakeup a second, and ensuring that all applications that need to be woken during that second are woken at the same time has a significant benefit on power consumption.



g_timeout_add_seconds does not "really" sync globally.

The kernel could schedule a common (across all apps) wakeup time a little bit better than g_timeout_add_seconds(), if the application could specify a time "range" of how long it would like to approx. sleep. Also g_timeout_add_seconds() does not work with select/poll.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]