On Tue, 27 May 2008 18:59:26 -0400 Theodore Tso <tytso@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 02:32:02PM -0700, Kristen Carlson Accardi wrote: > > > > As far as I know the patch has gone nowhere. I believe that > > Jeff wanted something more flexible than the module parameter that > > I provided to override the BIOS options. I am not working on this, > > I figured he had a pretty firm idea what he wanted so he was better > > equipped to write the patch. > > Thanks Kristen, > > Can you say which laptops you had tested this on where it saved power? > (Did you test any Thinkpads, in particular?) I'm wondering if it's > worth trying to forward port your patch as a private mod to my kernel; > 30 to 40 minutes of extra battery life is nothing to sneeze at! > > - Ted > I tested this on an Intel mobile software development platform with a newer mobile ICH - the power savings were measured at the actual component (via probes on the ICH), so I did not measure the power savings at the wall socket, although I would expect the power savings to be even greater on the other side of the power supply. So in short, yes, I think it's worth it to give it a try - the patch is pretty unintrusive, so it should be that difficult a port to do. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
