Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 3 May 2010 22:39:19 +0100 | From | Matthew Garrett <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH]PM QOS refresh against next-20100430 |
| |
On Mon, May 03, 2010 at 10:01:50AM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: > Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> writes: > > Well, shallow could mean that the state lacks the CPUIDLE_FLAG_DEEP > > flag; that should be relatively portable. In any case, it seems > > more so than "if I put in a 55us latency requirement, I'll stay out > > of C3". > > I guess it depends on your goal. Do you just want to stay out of C3 > on your current platform? or do you want to stay out of any low-power > state (on any platform) where you'll have a latency of > 55 usecs?
I'd say that one plausible requirement is "DMA works", with another being "all interrupts work" as distinguished from "wakeup interrupts work".
-- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org
| |