Re: [PATCH]PM QOS refresh against next-20100430

[Matthew Garrett]

On Mon, May 03, 2010 at 10:01:50AM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx> writes:
> > Well, shallow could mean that the state lacks the CPUIDLE_FLAG_DEEP
> > flag; that should be relatively portable.  In any case, it seems
> > more so than "if I put in a 55us latency requirement, I'll stay out
> > of C3".
> 
> I guess it depends on your goal.  Do you just want to stay out of C3
> on your current platform?  or do you want to stay out of any low-power
> state (on any platform) where you'll have a latency of > 55 usecs?

I'd say that one plausible requirement is "DMA works", with another 
being "all interrupts work" as distinguished from "wakeup interrupts 
work".

-- 
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/