Re: [RFD] Automatic suspend

[Arjan van de Ven]

On Tue, 17 Feb 2009 21:11:31 -0800
Arve HjÃnnevÃg <arve@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 4:04 PM, Arjan van de Ven
> <arjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Tue, 17 Feb 2009 09:32:46 -0600
> > "Woodruff, Richard" <r-woodruff2@xxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >> > so use range timers / timer slack for those apps that you do not
> >> > trust. That is not a big deal, and solves the issue of timer
> >> > wakeups...
> >>
> >> I not so sure it is that straight forward in practice.  End systems
> >> integrate a lot of 3rd party software who view performance 1st and
> >> have no thought of power.
> >
> > you know that with the range timers/slack, you can control the
> > "rounding" of the timer of the application, right?
> > You can *directly* throttle the number of wakeups an application
> > causes that way to a value you set.
> 
> I thought the point of range timers was to align multiple timers so
> they wakeup at the same time, not to throttle individual timers.

it works both ways.



-- 
Arjan van de Ven 	Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings, 
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
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/