Re: Network drivers that don't suspend on interface down

[Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>]

On Wed, 2006-12-20 at 17:40 +0100, Olivier Galibert wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 20, 2006 at 04:34:17PM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > 5 seconds is unfair and unrealistic though. The *hardware* negotiation
> > before link is seen can easily take upto 45 seconds already.
> > That's a network topology/hardware issue (spanning tree fun) that
> > software or even the hardware in your PC can do nothing about.
> 
> It's about ergonomics, not technical capabilities or fairness.
not entirely.

> 
> 
> > this means that the "power up time" needs to be at least 45 seconds, if
> > it's then down 5 seconds inbetween... that's not real power savings.
> 
> Then that means you can't have usable autodetection and power savings
> at the same time. 

even if you have NO power savings you still don't meet your criteria.
That's basic ethernet for you....

That's what I was trying to say; your criteria is unrealistic regardless
of what the kernel does, ethernet already dictates 30 to 45 seconds
there.


-- 
if you want to mail me at work (you don't), use arjan (at) linux.intel.com
Test the interaction between Linux and your BIOS via http://www.linuxfirmwarekit.org

-
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/