[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <28da6a0a-cda6-82f1-9200-4a0bb30c0663@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2018 15:59:42 +0100
From: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
To: Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
Cc: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>,
Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@...ovan.org>,
Johan Hedberg <johan.hedberg@...il.com>,
linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
Leif Liddy <leif.linux@...il.com>,
Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>,
Daniel Drake <drake@...lessm.com>,
Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@...onical.com>,
matadeen@....qualcomm.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
Benson Leung <bleung@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: udev USB autosupend whitelist (was Re: [PATCH] Bluetooth: btusb:
Restore QCA Rome suspend/resume fix with a "rewritten" version)
Hi,
On 16-02-18 17:49, Brian Norris wrote:
> + Benson (and there are probably others that know better answers)
>
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 09:26:37AM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
>> Going a bit off-topic here, so changed the subject.
>> I will reply on topic in another mail.
>>
>> On 16-02-18 03:27, Brian Norris wrote:
>>> I use a set of udev rules that manually whitelist devices for
>>> autosuspend. You can see it here:
>>>
>>> https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumos/platform2/+/43728a93f6de137006c6b92fbb2a7cc4f353c9bf/power_manager/udev/gen_autosuspend_rules.py#83
>>>
>>> You'll find at least one Rome chip in there.
>>
>> Oh, that is a very interesting link for the work I've been doing to
>> improve Linux power-consumption in general:
>>
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ImprovedLaptopBatteryLife
>>
>> I was actually planning on at least doing such a list for WWAN modems,
>> for btusb my approach has been to just enable it everywhere
>> (except for QCA devices as I got bugreports for those).
>>
>> Note that I plan to eventually submit this whitelist to the
>> udev rules which are part of systemd upstream, so if chromeos
>> is using systemd too, this is something to be aware of for you.
>
> Chrome OS does not currently use systemd, but thanks for the heads up.
>
>> Question, is the white-listing of the root and rate-limiting
>> hubs really necessary? I thought these have this enabled by default?
>
> This list is old and maintained by several of my team, originating from
> quite a ways back (i.e., much older kernels). It's quite possible that
> some of it is redundant today.
Ok, I double checked and it seems that explicitly setting power/control
to auto for any USB hub is not necessary as they all default to auto
now.
So FWIW you may want to consider removing this.
Regards,
Hans
Powered by blists - more mailing lists