View Single Post
javispedro's Avatar
Posts: 2,355 | Thanked: 5,249 times | Joined on Jan 2009 @ Barcelona
#9
Back when I realized that this device had this terribly idiotic behavior*, I tried figuring out how to take a permanent wakelock from the Android side. I did not know about the mce "feature" and thus decided to create a new daemon (actually, a kernel module).

The thing is, the battery doesn't actually seem to take a very hard hit (in fact, I got slightly more battery life after enabling the "permanent wakelock" -- but obviously because of measurement error). Then I discovered the craze about the "other half power vampire" and I suspect I will have to redo tests, but at least that got my hopes somewhat high again. I also must mention that I have not inserted a SIM card yet.

* Which is the same as every other Android device out there. That's one benefit less of Jolla vs other Android devices, and one big con when comparing to Maemo devices See blog post on why opportunistic suspend is wrong right from the mouth of a member of the original N900 team.

Code:
This supposedly could help (from irc when asking if screen on could be faked):
    echo asdf > /sys/power/wake_lock
The problem with that is that wake locks are deleted when the process that created them dies. In the above command line, a subshell (or /bin/echo) is the one creating the wakelock and thus the lock dies as soon as echo dies, which is immediate. EDIT: Possibly wrong, see next page.

Last edited by javispedro; 2013-12-29 at 20:10.
 

The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to javispedro For This Useful Post: