[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090216145655.727cd39c@infradead.org>
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 14:56:55 -0800
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
To: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
pm list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Nigel Cunningham <nigel@...el.suspend2.net>,
Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
mark gross <mgross@...ux.intel.com>,
"Woodruff, Richard" <r-woodruff2@...com>,
Uli Luckas <u.luckas@...d.de>,
Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@...ia.com>,
Brian Swetland <swetland@...gle.com>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFD] Automatic suspend
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009 17:40:10 -0500 (EST)
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu> wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> > OK, so I think there are two things that user space may be allowed
> > to do as far as putting devices into low power states is concerned:
> > * disable/enable the automatic power management of the device
> > (provided that the driver supports the automatic PM)
>
> Set the automatic PM parameters (idle timeout, state to go to,
> etc.). And disabling automatic PM altogether (effectively the same as
> setting the idle timeout to infinity).
>
shouldn't idle timeout etc be internal to the driver?
Yes policy preferences / constraints makes sense to communicate,
actual settings do not. For one they keep changing fast all the time
anyway.
--
Arjan van de Ven Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings,
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
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