Re: [linux-pm] suspend blockers & Android integration

[Felipe Contreras]

2010/6/6  <david@xxxxxxx>:
> On Sun, 6 Jun 2010, Brian Swetland wrote:
> if you could shrink the time awake to 0.01 second per wakeup you would shift
> this all up a category (and avoiding the need to wake everything up to
> service a timer would help do this)
>
> this effort very definantly has diminishing returns as you go to larger
> sleep periods as the constant standby power draw becomes more and more
> dominating. someone mentioned that they were getting the sleep time of
> normal systems up past the 1 second mark with the 10 second mark looking
> very attainable. that is where you get the most benifit for whatever changes
> are needed. getting up to a 2 min sleep time really gives you about all the
> benifit that you can get, going from there to 15 min makes very little
> difference.
>
> don't let chasing the best possible sleep time prevent you from considering
> options that would be good enough in time, but would drastically reduce the
> maintinance effort (as things could be upstreamed more easily), and would be
> usable on far more systems.

Not to mention the fact that there's nothing fundamental that prevents
dynamic PM to reach > 15 min idle. It's a matter of time before we
find the tools needed. The amount of work that suspend blockers would
require to implement properly in user-space other than Android just
doesn't match the power savings.

-- 
Felipe Contreras
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/