On Wed, 2007-01-31 at 11:48 +0100, ext Andi Kleen wrote: > On Wednesday 31 January 2007 11:27, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 12:13:04PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > Matthew Garrett <mjg59 at srcf.ucam.org> writes: > > > > > > > > PCI seems to require a delay of 10ms when sequencing from D3 to D0, > > > > which probably isn't acceptable latency for an "up" state. > > > > > > It might be if the interface has been idle for some time > > > (and the delay is not busy looping of course) > > > > Hm. How would this interact with receiving packets? > > The hardware will hopefully have support to wake itself up when that > happens. Yes. Low power states without ability to respond to wakeup interrupts would be broken behaviour generally.
