[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <466E1080.4070504@garzik.org>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 23:18:24 -0400
From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
CC: Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>,
Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen.c.accardi@...el.com>,
james.bottomley@...eleye.com, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 0/3] AHCI Link Power Management
Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> Jeff Garzik wrote:
>> SATA standard defines lower power phy states. So the same argument
>> you're using for AHCI applies there too -- "just" enabling an existing
>> hardware feature.
> yes I'm not arguing against that. I was trying to find out (and
> suggest-unless-proven-otherwise) that the 2 are not exclusive or
> conflicting... in fact I assume both are wanted concurrently.
Yes and no. As I understand it, AHCI's capability is an automatic
version of what standard SATA phys provide manually. In AHCI's case,
the hardware automatically manages the link power, possibly cycling it
hundreds of times per second. In the standard case, software must
determine when a different power state is appropriate based on current
conditions, and update the phy appropriately.
Jeff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists