Re: [RFC] maximum latency tracking infrastructure

[Daniel Walker <dwalker@mvista.com>]

On Thu, 2006-08-24 at 19:41 +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> Subject: [RFC] maximum latency tracking infrastructure
> From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
> 
> The patch below adds infrastructure to track "maximum allowable latency" for power
> saving policies.
> 
> The reason for adding this infrastructure is that power management in the
> idle loop needs to make a tradeoff between latency and power savings (deeper
> power save modes have a longer latency to running code again). 
> The code that today makes this tradeoff just does a rather simple algorithm;

I was just thinking that it might be cleaner to register a structure
instead of tracking identifiers to usecs. You might get a speed up on
some of the operations, like unregister.

Another thing I was thinking about is that this seems somewhat contrary
to the idea of using dynamic tick (assuming it was in mainline) to
heuristically pick a power state. Do you have any thoughts on how you
would combine the two?

Daniel

-
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/