Re: [PATCH 05/13] PM: Add option to disable /sys/power/state interface

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

 



On Monday 09 February 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Sunday 08 February 2009, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > > Being in suspend, where periodic user and kernel timers aren't running,
> > > and random userspace threads aren't possibly spinning, rather than just
> > > being in idle in the lowest power possible state, represent a pretty
> > > significant power savings.
> >
> > If kernel timers fire too often, fix them. If user land spins, fix it,
> > or SIGSTOP.
> >
> > And yes, autosleep is useful. That's why I done those "sleepy linux"
> > patches.
>
> I agree, it is.  Still, I don't think the wakelocks in the proposed form
> are the right way to implement it.
>
What do you think is the right approach then?

Uli
_______________________________________________
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