Re: [RFC] maximum latency tracking infrastructure

[Matthew Garrett]

On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 07:41:35PM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:

> +	/* the ipw2100 hardware really doesn't want power management delays
> +	 * longer than 500usec
> +	 */
> +	modify_acceptable_latency("ipw2100", 500);
> +

Hm. My BIOS claims that the C3 transition period is 85usec (and even my 
C4 is 185) , but I've hit the error path where C3 gets disabled. Is this 
really adequate? Also, by the looks of it, the C3 disabling path is 
still present - is it still theoretically necessary with the above, or 
is this just a belt and braces approach?

-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/