Re: [PATCH] remove CONFIG_ANDROID

[Kalesh Singh <kaleshsingh@google.com>]

On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 1:47 PM Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Kalesh,
>
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 12:05:23PM -0700, Kalesh Singh wrote:
> > Thanks for raising this.
> >
> > Android no longer uses PM_AUTOSLEEP, is correct. libsuspend is
> > also now deprecated. Android autosuspend is initiatiated from the
> > userspace system suspend service [1].
> >
> > A runtime config sounds more reasonable since in the !PM_AUTOSLEEP
> > case, it is userspace which decides the suspend policy.
> >
> > [1] https://cs.android.com/android/platform/superproject/+/bf3906ecb33c98ff8edd96c852b884dbccb73295:system/hardware/interfaces/suspend/1.0/default/SystemSuspend.cpp;l=265
>
> Bingo, thanks for the pointer. So looking at this, I'm trying to tease
> out some heuristic that wouldn't require any changes, but I don't really
> see anything _too_ perfect. One fragment of an idea would be that the
> kernel treats things in autosuspending mode if anybody is holding open a
> fd to /sys/power/state. But I worry this would interact with
> non-autosuspending userspaces that also hold open the file. So barring
> that, I'm not quite sure.
>
> If you also can't think of something, maybe we should talk about adding
> something that requires code changes. In that line of thinking, how
> would you feel about opening /sys/power/userspace_autosuspender and
> keeping that fd open. Then the kernel API would have
> `bool pm_has_userspace_autosuspender(void)` that code could check.
> Alternatively, if you don't want refcounting fd semantics for that, just
> writing a "1" into a similar file seems fine?
>
> Any strong opinions about it? Personally it doesn't make much of a
> difference to me. The important thing is just that it'd be something
> you're willing to implement in that SystemSuspend.cpp file.

Hi Jason,

Thanks for taking a look. I'm concerned holding the sys/power/state
open would have unintentional side effects. Adding the
/sys/power/userspace_autosuspender seems more appropriate. We don't
have a use case for the refcounting, so would prefer the simpler
writing '0' / '1' to toggle semantics.

Thanks,
Kalesh

>
> Jason