#10363 NORM 10.1.3: Auto-Suspend gets in the way when sharing over Salut

Simon Schampijer simon at schampijer.de
Wed Oct 13 07:20:17 EDT 2010

On 10/13/2010 12:14 PM, James Cameron wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 11:47:07AM +0200, Simon Schampijer wrote:
>> On 10/13/2010 12:29 AM, James Cameron wrote:
>>> On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 05:27:27PM +0200, Simon Schampijer wrote:
>>>> For 0.84 we can do what powerd offers, creating a file based on the pid
>>>> in /var/run/powerd-inhibit-suspend/ (those are removed by powerd when it
>>>> goes into suspend the next time).
>>> If I understand correctly, these are only removed if the process with
>>> the pid no longer exists.  We can rely on /var/run being empty on boot,
>>> since it is a tmpfs.
>> Right, so in the case of an activity that inhibit suspend because it is
>> shared you have to close the activity in order to get out of that state.
>> There is currently no way to 'un-share' an activity.
> That appears to be a Sugar design feature.
>> So, in order for powerd to kick in the activity has to be closed and
>> therefore it will remove the file.
> powerd will not idle suspend while that file and the matching process is
> present on the system.  If either are not present, powerd may idle
> suspend subject to other data.
>> Or do I oversee something why we can not rely on my assumption?
> I don't understand this question, sorry.
> My reply was specifically aimed at your statement that the files "are
> removed by powerd when it goes into suspend the next time".

Ok, my point was that I do not have to unlink the files in Sugar, since 
powerd takes care of that. I guess we both have the same understanding 
of what powerd does just that we describe it differently. No need to 
discuss here further from my side.


More information about the Devel mailing list