[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201105131854.57854.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 18:54:57 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To: Raffaele Recalcati <lamiaposta71@...il.com>
Cc: linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
davinci-linux-open-source@...ux.davincidsp.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: pm loss development
On Friday, May 13, 2011, Raffaele Recalcati wrote:
> Hi Rafael,
>
> 2011/5/12 Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl>:
> > On Thursday, May 12, 2011, Raffaele Recalcati wrote:
> >> What happen normally in runtime pm implementation is that every devices
> >> are switched off and are enabled only when needed.
> >> In our case instead we have a completely functional embedded system and,
> >> when an asyncrhonous event appear, we have only some tens milliseconds
> >> before the actual power failure takes place.
> >> This patchset add a support in order to switch off not vital part of the system,
> >> in order to allow the board to survive longer.
> >> This allow the possibility to save important data.
> >
> > OK, so first, who decides what parts of the system are vital and what aren't?
>
> Take a quick look at Documentation/power/loss.txt paragrpah "2.4
> Power loss policies".
> You can decide what can be powered off.
I read the patches. My question was about the general idea of who should
be responsible of making these decisions.
Thanks,
Rafael
--
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