Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 29 Dec 2007 23:51:34 +0000 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] sleepy linux |
| |
Hi!
> > ... I also don't need to call any suspend() routines, because all the > > drivers are already suspended, right? > > Well, you have a number of devices which cannot do runtime pm. > They can do suspend/resume with the whole system. For them these > operations mean saving/restoring state. > So for these devices implementing autosuspend makes no sense. > They would sensibly do only idle/busy detection.
Yep... Let's call busy/idle detection and save/restore state "autosuspend" for those devices. It does not save any power, but it can be viewed as "kind-of-suspend". (No, I do not have this kind of details ready).
> > And yes, I want device activity to prevent s2ram. If user is burning > > CD, machine should not sleep. If user is actively typing, machine > > In these cases the devices involved should report themselves busy, > shouldn't they?
Yes.
> > should not sleep. My vision is: screen saver tells kernel keyboard > > need not be very responsive, at that point keyboard driver can > > autosuspend the keyboard, and if that was the last device, whole > > system sleeps. > > We lack a notion of telling devices that they are opened only for > detecting wakeups. Currently a driver has to assume that an opened > device has to be fully functional.
Yes, we'll need to add some userland interfaces. No, this will not be easy.
Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
| |