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

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: <1274981871.27810.5650.camel@twins>
Date:	Thu, 27 May 2010 19:37:51 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc:	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Florian Mickler <florian@...kler.org>,
	Linux PM <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Linux OMAP Mailing List <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
	felipe.balbi@...ia.com, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8)

On Thu, 2010-05-27 at 13:32 -0400, Alan Stern wrote:

> On some platforms (like those with ACPI), deeper power-savings are
> available by using forced suspend than by using idle. 

Sounds like something that's fixable, doesn't it?

>  That used to be
> the case on Android.  Arve has said that it isn't necessarily true any
> more, but that's the way their software is set up.

Who cares about their current software? We're arguing about sensible
interfaces for the technical problem posed.


--
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/