2010/6/5 Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@xxxxxxxxxxx>: > On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 9:28 AM, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Sat, 05 Jun 2010 11:54:13 +0200 >> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, 2010-06-04 at 17:10 -0700, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote: >>> > > Trusted processes are assumed to be sane and idle when there is >>> > > nothing for them to do, allowing the machine to go into deep idle >>> > > states. >>> > > >>> > >>> > Neither the kernel nor our trusted user-space code currently meets >>> > this criteria. >>> >>> Then both need fixing. Really, that's the only sane approach. >> >> fwiw... in MeeGo we're seeing quite good idle times (> 1 seconds) >> without really bad hacks. >> > > We clearly have different standards for what we consider good. We > measure time suspended in minutes or hours, not seconds, and waking up > every second or two causes a noticeable decrease in battery life on > the hardware we have today. Are you stating that the existing Android implementation enters the suspended state for hours for any of the existing designs? ~Vitaly _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
