On Mon, 2011-02-07 at 14:38 +0200, ext Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote: > On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Juuso Oikarinen > <juuso.oikarinen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, 2011-02-07 at 14:09 +0200, ext Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote: > >> On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 1:30 PM, <juuso.oikarinen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > > >> > From: Juuso Oikarinen <juuso.oikarinen@xxxxxxxxx> > >> > > >> > Currently the wl12xx interrupts are not configured to wake up the host, which > >> > leads to reduced performance. > >> > >> Can you elaborate what do you mean ? > >> > >> Today the chip is powered off at system suspend, so it won't trigger > >> any interrupts anyway. > >> > >> When additional suspend modes will be introduced (e.g. WoWL) this will > >> be needed of course. > > > > These are not just for suspend, AFAIK, but apply also to power saving > > states. > > What power states do you mean ? do you mean the cpuidle path ? I don't > think it's related. > > Can you please describe what was the reduced performance that this > solved for you ? performance is a hot topic for us now :) Actually this I don't see any performance impact for better or worse of this patch on brief testing. I was instructed by some of our other kernel-dudes that this is actually needed for the cpuidle path too, or there might be some implications. I'm currently trying to find out if this is really needed or not. -Juuso -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
