| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=0T_jmEju+cP8zG8EC0ns-mwKHYw@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 14 May 2011 22:21:57 +0200 From: Raffaele Recalcati <lamiaposta71@...il.com> To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl> Cc: linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org, davinci-linux-open-source@...ux.davincidsp.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: pm loss development > I read the patches. My question was about the general idea of who should > be responsible of making these decisions. The best should be, I think, to have some guidelines and than the possibility to choose the best policy for each situation. In my board I needed to shutdown video in capture and demodulator circuit, so I have implemented vpfe capture switch off, that does stream_off to all its v4l2 subdevices (a pal decoder and a video demodulator). So I can save 30mA, and it allows to my board to survive longer. I need to do some tests and have some data with and without PM loss. Bye, raffaele -- www.opensurf.it -- 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