[maemo-developers] Bug#6203, rotation and OHMD

From: Cornelius Hald hald at icandy.de
Date: Wed Nov 18 18:44:10 EET 2009
I see many use cases for those policies like an incoming phone call
should work properly even while some app is doing heavy number

However rotation is a different thing. I mean what's the objective? The
rotation animation should be smooth even if something uses a lot of
processing time? Fair enough. But pausing the _foreground_ application
is hardly the solution. How about pausing all _background_ applications?

The foreground application is the only application interested in the
rotation. Therefore it already specifies explicitly that it can rotate.
If I now write an application it's my duty to give the CPU some time
while rotating. If I don't do this, _my_ application looks shitty and
everyone will tell me. It's not the platform that gets a bad reputation,
it's my app.

So, if anything should get paused, it's all applications which are not
white listed and which are not in the foreground.

If I somehow missed the point, please tell me :)


On Wed, 2009-11-18 at 18:07 +0200, Eero Tamminen wrote:
> Hi,
> ext Eugene Antimirov wrote:
> >> It handles also audio policies and tries to make sure that you get
> >> your phone calls when the device is heavily loaded and some other
> >> minor things.
> > 
> > Just to know.
>  >
> > I see now this `ohmd` process in my 41-10. I did not get it, was this
> > daemon improved or made worse in new firmware released lately?
> Better for known (pre-installed) applications, worse for unknown
> applications.  The reason for this is that unknown applications have
> unknown resource usage so system policy treats them with more care.
> It's a bit of a chicken and egg problem.  Changing the policy is slow
> iterative work requiring lots of testing that the policy change doesn't
> significantly worsen other use-cases in some situations (e.g. for things
> for which there are certain certification & legal requirements).
> Developers can now experiment and report/discuss things which they would
> like policy to handle better (for certain classes of 3rd applications
> and their use-cases). I.e. in regards to 3rd party applications, the
> policies could be considered work-in-progress.
> Things that could potentially be done for 3rd party applications
> policy handling:
> - Default policy is improved in regards to unknown processes.
>    It's yet unknown whether this can be done well enough without
>    sacrificing the known functionality, that's why feedback is needed
>    on the behavior of 3rd party application use-cases.
> - Applications themselves specify the required policy on install.
>    This is extra work for apps, and requires extensive testing to
>    guarantee that the policy they choose is good match for
>    the application in all cases. (application doesn't leak or
>    otherwise hog resources)
> - Some way for user to specify per-application policy.
>    I'm sure power-users would like that... :-)
> 	- Eero
> _______________________________________________
> maemo-developers mailing list
> maemo-developers at maemo.org
> https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers

More information about the maemo-developers mailing list