On 12/20/06, Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yeah, I guess that's a problem. From a user perspective, the > functionality is only really useful if the latency is very small. I > think where possible we'd want to power down the chip while keeping the > phy up, but it would be nice to know how much power that would actually > cost us. I'm no expert but afaik the PHY is the power hungry part, the rest is peanuts. So if we can get the PHY to sleep most of the time that would be great.
The MAC uses some part of power, but FYI at least e1000 already does phy power management when IF_DOWN, if wake on lan isn't enabled, smbus isn't enabled, etc etc. If we started using D3 power management its possible a whole bunch of code would go away out of e1000. Is there some reason why we can't have the OS just do the D3 transition for all drivers that register support? I mean, this power management using D states is actually driver *independent* and at least way back in the day was supposed to be implemented for "OS power management" - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html