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

From: Aniello Del Sorbo anidel at gmail.com
Date: Wed Nov 18 19:17:56 EET 2009
2009/11/18 Cornelius Hald <hald at icandy.de>:
> I see many use cases for those policies like an incoming phone call
> should work properly even while some app is doing heavy number
> crunching.
> 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 :)
> Cheers!
> Conny

How dare you steal my words out of my hands before I even write them!
No, I miss the point as well..


> 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
> _______________________________________________
> maemo-developers mailing list
> maemo-developers at maemo.org
> https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers

Sent from London, Eng, United Kingdom
More information about the maemo-developers mailing list