Re: [PATCH] implement pm_ops.valid for everybody

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi,

* David Brownell <david-b@xxxxxxxxxxx> [070322 14:30]:
> On Thursday 22 March 2007 6:44 am, Scott E. Preece wrote:
> > | From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@xxxxxxx>
> > | 
> > | I think we can define "standby" a bit more precisely.  Something like:
> > | - processes are frozen,
> > | - devices are suspended,
> 
> True of all sleep states, although one wants "suspended" to
> allow different levels of device functionality.  (Maybe it
> can wake up, maybe its firmware is monitoring the WLAN, etc.)

In addition to offering wakeup events for individual devices,
the device suspend states should be something like retention
and suspend, where:

Retention is where clocks are off for a device, but power is on.
In this case the device registers are maintained in hardware.

Suspend is where clocks and power are off. In this state the
device registers are maintained in software.

Laptops mostly have suspend, while socs allow both retention
and suspend in many cases.

Regards,

Tony
_______________________________________________
linux-pm mailing list
linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm


[Index of Archives]     [Linux ACPI]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [CPU Freq]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux