On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 18:15:21 -0700 Arjan van de Ven <ar...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On 9/25/2013 4:47 PM, Andi Kleen wrote: > >> Also, the changelogs don't appear to discuss one obvious downside: the > >> latency incurred in bringing a bank out of one of the low-power states > >> and back into full operation. Please do discuss and quantify that to > >> the best of your knowledge. > > > > On Sandy Bridge the memry wakeup overhead is really small. It's on by > > default > > in most setups today. > > btw note that those kind of memory power savings are content-preserving, > so likely a whole chunk of these patches is not actually needed on SNB > (or anything else Intel sells or sold) (head spinning a bit). Could you please expand on this rather a lot? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
