Re: suspend blockers & Android integration

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

 



* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> [...]
> 
> And those two things go together. The /sys/power/state thing is a global 
> suspend - which I don't think is appropriate for a opportunistic thing in 
> the first place, especially for multi-core.
> 
> A well-designed opportunistic suspend should be a two-phase thing: an 
> opportunistc CPU hotunplug (shutting down cores one by one as the system is 
> idle), and not a "global" event in the first place. And only when you've 
> reached single-core state should you then say "do I suspend the system too".

Shutting a core down would be a natural idle level, and when the last one goes 
idle we can do the suspend. (it happens as part of suspend anyway)

So on systems that dont want to auto-suspend this would indeed behave like you 
suggest: the final core left would run as UP in essence.

	Ingo
_______________________________________________
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