From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755509AbZBPXCz (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Feb 2009 18:02:55 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750938AbZBPXCr (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Feb 2009 18:02:47 -0500 Received: from ogre.sisk.pl ([217.79.144.158]:57912 "EHLO ogre.sisk.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750863AbZBPXCr (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Feb 2009 18:02:47 -0500 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: Alan Stern Subject: Re: [RFD] Automatic suspend Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 00:02:36 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.11.0 (Linux/2.6.29-rc5-tst; KDE/4.2.0; x86_64; ; ) Cc: Arjan van de Ven , pm list , LKML , Arve =?iso-8859-1?q?Hj=F8nnev=E5g?= , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Pavel Machek , Nigel Cunningham , Matthew Garrett , mark gross , "Woodruff, Richard" , Uli Luckas , Igor Stoppa , Brian Swetland , Len Brown References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200902170002.37973.rjw@sisk.pl> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Monday 16 February 2009, Alan Stern wrote: > On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > OK, so I think there are two things that user space may be allowed to do as > > far as putting devices into low power states is concerned: > > * disable/enable the automatic power management of the device (provided that > > the driver supports the automatic PM) > > Set the automatic PM parameters (idle timeout, state to go to, etc.). Yes. I'm not sure about the state part, though. > And disabling automatic PM altogether (effectively the same as setting > the idle timeout to infinity). Yes. > > * check what power states devices are in. > > What about situations where we want to distinguish between the power > state of the device itself and the power state of the link? For a disk > drive we may want to power the link on and off quite a lot, as that > has low latency, but spinning the disk up and down takes a long time > and so should have a longer idle-time value. Well, I'm not sure at the moment. Do you have any suggestions? Rafael