Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 6 Nov 2006 14:57:51 +0100 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: SATA powersave patches |
| |
Hi!
First, sorry for long reply time. I had too many horses and not enough time.
> >>Can you check if there is any difference between [D/H]IPS and static? > >>ICH6M on my notebook can't do DIPS/HIPS, so I couldn't compare them > >>against static. > > > >What is D/HIPS? I could not find anything relevant.. > > D/HIPS stand for device/host initiated power saving. These modes use > two SATA link powersaving state (partial and slumber). Static mode > simply turns off PHY on unoccupied port using SControl register. So, if > you have an access to a notebook which has a SATA dock which support > link powersaving, you can test it by... > > * set link powersaving mode to HIPS/static. (mode 4) > > * w/ device inserted, leave it idle for 15 seconds and record power > consumption level (link should be in slumber state). > > * pull out the device, wait for libata to detach the device and record > power consumption level (libata should have turned off PHY after > detaching the device). > > I wanna know whether there is any difference in the amount of power > saved between slumber and off states.
I'm probably doing something wrong, but...
I'm on commit
commit 9a7b050525f7d70d2ed62affb691b9d4ca2b82d2 tree b8195e5625dc5bad6757b0dddec0dacf416a0779 parent 50c3086de212ce56eaa2bf284586fb021615b5e1 author Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com> Mon, 16 Oct 2006 07:24:57 +0900 committer Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com> Mon, 16 Oct 2006 07:24:57 +0900
[PATCH] sata_sil24: implement PORT_RST
As DEV_RST (hardreset) sometimes fail to recover the controller (especially after PMP DMA CS errata). In such cases, perform PORT_RST prior to DEV_RST.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>
(2.6.19-rc1)
and I do not see powersave tunable:
root@amd:/sys/module# ls libata/parameters/ ata_probe_timeout atapi_enabled hotplug_polling_interval atapi_dmadir fua
...how do I pull working version?
> >>So, I think option #1 is the way to go - implementing leveled dynamic > >>power management infrastructure and adding support in the block layer. > >>What do you think? > > > >Would be nice :-). > > So, do you think we're ready for another PM infrastructure update? :-P
Well... things are pretty quiet in that area just now... So yes. Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |