> On Tue, 17 Feb 2009 09:32:46 -0600 > "Woodruff, Richard" <r-woodruff2@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > > so use range timers / timer slack for those apps that you do not > > > trust. That is not a big deal, and solves the issue of timer > > > wakeups... > > > > I not so sure it is that straight forward in practice. End systems > > integrate a lot of 3rd party software who view performance 1st and > > have no thought of power. > > you know that with the range timers/slack, you can control the > "rounding" of the timer of the application, right? I've not explored user space for this. Can on a per-application basis some controlling application cause timers of a target process to be rounded or is it global? Or do you need to link the new application to use special glib variants (as described in OLS papers a few years ago)? > You can *directly* throttle the number of wakeups an application causes > that way to a value you set. Are you talking about your work as seen in lwn.net summary? http://lwn.net/Articles/296578/ Your change here does look like something which could be used to control timers. Don't you still need some dynamic way to set the fuzz/slack if its globally applied? It seems like you might want some timers precise and others fuzzy. Would the holding of a wakelock or some activity counter be a good trigger for switching rounding time? If wakelocks held "minor adjustment" else "major adjustment" Thanks for the good pointer assuming I understood it in quick scan. Thanks, Richard W. _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
