linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 6)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1005040949060.1729-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
Date:	Tue, 4 May 2010 09:51:39 -0400 (EDT)
From:	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To:	Matthew Garrett <mjg@...hat.com>
cc:	Kevin Hilman <khilman@...prootsystems.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
	Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>,
	<linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Paul Walmsley <paul@...an.com>, <magnus.damm@...il.com>,
	mark gross <mgross@...ux.intel.com>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	Geoff Smith <geoffx.smith@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 6)

On Tue, 4 May 2010, Matthew Garrett wrote:

> On Mon, May 03, 2010 at 04:37:22PM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> 
> > Please forgive the ignorance of ACPI (in embedded, we thankfully live
> > in magical world without ACPI) but doesn't that already happen with
> > CPUidle and C-states?  I think of CPUidle as basically runtime PM for
> > the CPU.  IOW, runtime PM manages the devices, CPUidle manages the CPU
> > (via C-states), resulting in dynaimc PM for the entire system.  What
> > am I missing?
> 
> ACPI doesn't provide any functionality for cutting power to most devices 
> other than shifting into full system suspend. The number of wakeup 
> events available to us on a given machine is usually small and the 
> wakeup latency large, so it's not terribly practical to do this 
> transparently on most hardware.

Another thing that Kevin is missing: There is more to the system than
the devices and the CPU.  For example: RAM, an embedded controller (on
modern desktop/laptop systems), a power supply, and so on.  Dynamic PM
for the CPU and the devices won't power-down these things, but system
PM will.

Alan Stern

--
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/