On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 04:21:09PM -0500, James Bottomley wrote: > You're the one mentioning x86, not me. I already explained that some > MSM hardware (the G1 for example) has lower power consumption in S3 > (which I'm using as an ACPI shorthand for suspend to ram) than any > suspend from idle C state. The fact that current x86 hardware has the > same problem may be true, but it's not entirely relevant. As long as you can set a wakeup timer, an S state is just a C state with side effects. The significant one is that entering an S state stops the process scheduler and any in-kernel timers. I don't think Google care at all about whether suspend is entered through an explicit transition or something hooked into cpuidle - the relevant issue is that they want to be able to express a set of constraints that lets them control whether or not the scheduler keeps on scheduling, and which doesn't let them lose wakeup events in the process. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
