From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: Run-time PM idea (was: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/2] PM: Rearrange core suspend code) Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 13:30:49 +0200 Message-ID: <200906081330.50045.rjw__44055.2027932883$1244460665$gmane$org@sisk.pl> References: <200906072347.00580.rjw@sisk.pl> <20090608065419.GA13568@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20090608065419.GA13568@elte.hu> Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Ingo Molnar Cc: ACPI Devel Maling List , pm list , LKML List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On Monday 08 June 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > +config PM_RUNTIME > > + bool "Run-time PM core functionality" > > + depends on PM > > + ---help--- > > + Enable functionality allowing I/O devices to be put into energy-saving > > + (low power) states at run time (or autosuspended) after a specified > > + period of inactivity and woken up in response to a hardware-generated > > + wake-up event or a driver's request. > > + > > + Hardware support is generally required for this functionality to work > > + and the bus type drivers of the buses the devices are on are > > + responsibile for the actual handling of the autosuspend requests and > > + wake-up events. > > Halleluya! :-) I guess this means you like the general idea. ;-) Well, we've been discussing it for quite a while and since more and more people are interested, I'm giving it a high priority. Best, Rafael