Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261790AbVCCO45 (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Mar 2005 09:56:57 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261793AbVCCO45 (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Mar 2005 09:56:57 -0500 Received: from atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz ([195.113.31.123]:55722 "EHLO atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261790AbVCCO4j (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Mar 2005 09:56:39 -0500 Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 15:55:23 +0100 From: Pavel Machek To: Todd Poynor Cc: Pavel Machek , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@osdl.org Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH] Custom power states for non-ACPI systems Message-ID: <20050303145522.GA3485@openzaurus.ucw.cz> References: <20050302020306.GA5724@slurryseal.ddns.mvista.com> <20050302085619.GA1364@elf.ucw.cz> <42263719.7030004@mvista.com> <20050302221150.GE1616@elf.ucw.cz> <422659B1.9090608@mvista.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <422659B1.9090608@mvista.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1729 Lines: 38 Hi! > >...but adding new /sys/power/state might be okay. We should not have > >introduced "standby" in the first place [but I guess it is not worth > >removing now]. If something has more than 2 states (does user really > >want to enter different states in different usage?), I guess we can > >add something like "deepmem" or whatever. Is there something with > >more > >than 3 states? > > In most of the cases I'm thinking of, it wouldn't be a user > requesting a state but rather software (say, a cell phone > progressively entering lower power states due to inactivity). I > haven't noticed a platform with more than 3 low-power modes so far, Are not your power states more like cpu power states? These are expected to be system states, and sleeping system does not take calls, etc... (Unless you have second cpu that wakes you on incoming call, that is). > but I'm sure it'll happen soon. If the time isn't right for > incompatible changes to these interfaces then I guess mapping standby > and mem to platform-specific things will work for now, maybe with > some tweak to allow a choice of actual state entered. At some more > opportune time in the future I'll suggest an attribute that allows a > choice of platform-specific method of suspend-to-mem, somewhat like > the "disk" attribute for suspend-to-disk. Or just resurrect your original patch when one more state is needed. -- 64 bytes from 195.113.31.123: icmp_seq=28 ttl=51 time=448769.1 ms - 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/