Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 28, 2007 at 12:15:50PM -0700, David Lang wrote:
>> with dynaticks now in the kernel it may even be possible to have the idle
>> process decide that the next event is far enough away that it should
>> suspend-to-ram until that point.
>
> This would be ideal (and it's broadly what the OLPC guys are aiming for,
> I think), but on most platforms you're looking at at least a second or
> so to resume. As far as I know, we're still looking at ~60 ticks a
> second at best for an average desktop, so that's not going to be a win.
As long as the system has a clear idea of how long it will take to resume, it
can schedule a wakeup for a reasonable amount of time before that. Ideally, a
completely unused system might not need a tick for several seconds. However,
I agree that it doesn't make sense to add such functionality to the kernel
until someone can show a system that can actually wait that long between
ticks.
- Josh Triplett
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
