lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jul]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Power Management framework proposal
On Tue, 24 Jul 2007, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:

> On Sun, 2007-07-22 at 10:26 -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>> On Sat, 2007-07-21 at 23:49 -0700, david@lang.hm wrote:
>>
>>> this approach would allow the transition of ALL drivers to the new mode of
>>> operation in one fell swoop, and then adding additional power management
>>> features is just adding to the existing list rather then implementing new
>>> functions.
>>
>>
>> I have a concern with this approach though. It seems to assume that
>> there is one global thing somewhere that sets the system state; in my
>> experience that is the wrong approach; in fact there is a very definite
>> evidence that there are many decisions on power that are to be made
>> local at a high frequency. An example of this is the processor speed;
>> the ondemand governer does exactly this for the cpus that can switch
>> speeds fast; it's just impossible to beat such a local, fast decision
>> with anything on a global scale.
>>
>> On the other hand, some things (the high level goals and constraints)
>> are obviously global.
>
> I think we need a set of constraints that trickle down the power tree
> and limit what a given driver can do locally.

what sort of contraints are you thinking of?

David Lang
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-07-24 22:19    [W:0.172 / U:0.076 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site