Hi!
>
> > > a quick feature request: could you please make the wake-on-RTC
> > > capability generic and add a CONFIG_DEBUG_SUSPEND_ON_RAM=y config
> > > option (disabled by default) that does a short 1-second
> > > suspend-to-RAM sequence upon bootup? That way we could test s2ram
> > > automat
* Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > a quick feature request: could you please make the wake-on-RTC
> > capability generic and add a CONFIG_DEBUG_SUSPEND_ON_RAM=y config
> > option (disabled by default) that does a short 1-second
> > suspend-to-RAM sequence upon bootup? That way we co
On Sun 2007-12-30 12:15:52, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Todays hardware is mostly capable of doing better: with correctly set
> > up wakeups, machine can sleep and successfully pretend it is not
> > sleeping -- by waking up whenever something interesti
Am Montag, 31. Dezember 2007 15:44:47 schrieb Pavel Machek:
> On Sun 2007-12-30 17:39:42, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > But what's wrong with calling suspend() the conventional way once you've
> > decided to go into sleepy mode?
>
> I'm not sure if it can be done in non-racy way. It is different from
On Sun 2007-12-30 17:39:42, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 30. Dezember 2007 00:51:34 schrieb Pavel Machek:
> > Hi!
> >
> > > > ... I also don't need to call any suspend() routines, because all the
> > > > drivers are already suspended, right?
> > >
> > > Well, you have a number of devices wh
Am Sonntag, 30. Dezember 2007 00:51:34 schrieb Pavel Machek:
> Hi!
>
> > > ... I also don't need to call any suspend() routines, because all the
> > > drivers are already suspended, right?
> >
> > Well, you have a number of devices which cannot do runtime pm.
> > They can do suspend/resume with t
* Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Todays hardware is mostly capable of doing better: with correctly set
> up wakeups, machine can sleep and successfully pretend it is not
> sleeping -- by waking up whenever something interesting happens. Of
> course, it is easier on machines not conn
Hi!
> > ... I also don't need to call any suspend() routines, because all the
> > drivers are already suspended, right?
>
> Well, you have a number of devices which cannot do runtime pm.
> They can do suspend/resume with the whole system. For them these
> operations mean saving/restoring state.
>
Hi!
> > > > Is there an easy way to tell if all the devices are runtime suspended?
> > >
> > > Do you really want to know whether they are suspended or whether they
> > > could be suspended?
> >
> > If they are suspended.
> >
> > My plan is: let the drivers autosuspend on their own. If I see al
Hi!
> >NOHZ + C4 + turn off screen + turn off disk + turn off SATA is still
> >~8W on thinkpad x60.
> >
> >S3 is ~1W.
> >
> >That's quite significant difference.
> >
> >(But yes, connected-to-ethernet is not most important use scenario.)
> >
Am Mittwoch, 26. Dezember 2007 21:32:58 schrieb Pavel Machek:
> ... I also don't need to call any suspend() routines, because all the
> drivers are already suspended, right?
Well, you have a number of devices which cannot do runtime pm.
They can do suspend/resume with the whole system. For them
Am Mittwoch, 26. Dezember 2007 21:32:58 schrieb Pavel Machek:
> On Wed 2007-12-26 21:23:37, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch, 26. Dezember 2007 21:17:22 schrieb Pavel Machek:
> > > Is there an easy way to tell if all the devices are runtime suspended?
> >
> > Do you really want to know whethe
Pavel Machek wrote:
On Wed 2007-12-26 12:43:56, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
Oliver Neukum wrote:
Am Mittwoch, 26. Dezember 2007 19:56:59 schrieb H. Peter Anvin:
3) Network card that is either down
or can wake up system on any packet (and not loose too many packets)
This is the big crux I see. Y
On Wed 2007-12-26 12:43:56, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Oliver Neukum wrote:
>> Am Mittwoch, 26. Dezember 2007 19:56:59 schrieb H. Peter Anvin:
3) Network card that is either down
or can wake up system on any packet (and not loose too many packets)
>>> This is the big crux I see. You
Oliver Neukum wrote:
Am Mittwoch, 26. Dezember 2007 19:56:59 schrieb H. Peter Anvin:
3) Network card that is either down
or can wake up system on any packet (and not loose too many packets)
This is the big crux I see. You're going to constantly wake up the
machine due to broadcast packets,
On Wed 2007-12-26 21:23:37, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 26. Dezember 2007 21:17:22 schrieb Pavel Machek:
> > On Wed 2007-12-26 18:28:04, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > > Am Mittwoch, 26. Dezember 2007 00:07:31 schrieb Pavel Machek:
> > > > Heute 00:07:31
> > > >
> > > > This is RFC. It does n
Am Mittwoch, 26. Dezember 2007 21:17:22 schrieb Pavel Machek:
> On Wed 2007-12-26 18:28:04, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch, 26. Dezember 2007 00:07:31 schrieb Pavel Machek:
> > > Heute 00:07:31
> > >
> > > This is RFC. It does not even work for me... it sleeps but it will not
> > > wake u
On Wed 2007-12-26 18:28:04, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 26. Dezember 2007 00:07:31 schrieb Pavel Machek:
> > Heute 00:07:31
> >
> > This is RFC. It does not even work for me... it sleeps but it will not
> > wake up, because SATA wakeup code is missing. Code attached for
> > illustratio
Am Mittwoch, 26. Dezember 2007 19:56:59 schrieb H. Peter Anvin:
> > 3) Network card that is either down
> > or can wake up system on any packet (and not loose too many packets)
> >
>
> This is the big crux I see. You're going to constantly wake up the
> machine due to broadcast packets, and
Pavel Machek wrote:
Yep... for the first version, I'll be very happy if it autosleeps when
I'm traveling by bus or something. Working with ethernet plugged in is
quite a distant goal.
(But I guess some cleverness could be done on the router or
something. Automagically converting "interesting" p
On Wed 2007-12-26 18:28:04, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 26. Dezember 2007 00:07:31 schrieb Pavel Machek:
> > Heute 00:07:31
> >
> > This is RFC. It does not even work for me... it sleeps but it will not
> > wake up, because SATA wakeup code is missing. Code attached for
> > illustratio
On Wed 2007-12-26 10:56:59, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Pavel Machek wrote:
>> This is RFC. It does not even work for me... it sleeps but it will not
>> wake up, because SATA wakeup code is missing. Code attached for
>> illustration.
>> I wonder if this is the right approach? What is right interface t
Pavel Machek wrote:
This is RFC. It does not even work for me... it sleeps but it will not
wake up, because SATA wakeup code is missing. Code attached for illustration.
I wonder if this is the right approach? What is right interface to the
drivers?
3) Network card that is either down
or can
Am Mittwoch, 26. Dezember 2007 00:07:31 schrieb Pavel Machek:
> Heute 00:07:31
>
> This is RFC. It does not even work for me... it sleeps but it will not
> wake up, because SATA wakeup code is missing. Code attached for illustration.
>
> I wonder if this is the right approach? What is right in
24 matches
Mail list logo
