From: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> To: Oliver Neukum <oliver@neukum.org> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>, Linux-pm mailing list <linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org>, ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [patch update] Re: [linux-pm] Run-time PM idea (was: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/2] PM: Rearrange core suspend code) Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 22:16:10 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview] Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0906112210340.21931-100000@netrider.rowland.org> (raw) In-Reply-To: <200906112305.49232.oliver@neukum.org> On Thu, 11 Jun 2009, Oliver Neukum wrote: > Am Donnerstag, 11. Juni 2009 20:36:30 schrieb Alan Stern: > > > Or abstractly any power saving state that does autoresume in hardware. > > > In these cases you know that you can enter a powersaving state that > > > will add X latency. > > > > > > In terms of user space API we'll probably add a way for user space > > > to specify how much latency may be added for power management's sake. > > > If busses are stacked the "latency budget" has to be handled at core > > > level. If furthermore states that allow IO but with additional latency > > > are ignored, the budget will be calculated wrongly. > > > > Okay, fine. What does this have to do with Rafael's work? Why does > > setting the status to RPM_SUSPENDED even when a device is not in a > > low-power state preclude handling buses that automatically change their > > power state? > > For these cases the tree constraint does not apply. What tree constraint? You mean that the PM core shouldn't allow devices to suspend unless all their children are suspended? Why doesn't it still apply? Remember, when Rafael and I say "suspend" here, we don't mean "go to a low-power state". We mean "the PM core calls the runtime_suspend method". No matter what actions the link hardware may decide to take on its own, the PM core will still want to observe the all-children-suspended restriction when calling runtime_suspend methods. > I think there are devices who can be suspended while children are active > and devices which can not be. This is an attribute of the device and should > be evaluated by the core. Clearly it should be decided by the driver. Should there be a bit for it in the dev_pm_info structure? Alan Stern -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> To: Oliver Neukum <oliver@neukum.org> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>, Linux-pm mailing list <linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org>, ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [patch update] Re: [linux-pm] Run-time PM idea (was: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/2] PM: Rearrange core suspend code) Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 22:16:10 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview] Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0906112210340.21931-100000@netrider.rowland.org> (raw) In-Reply-To: <200906112305.49232.oliver@neukum.org> On Thu, 11 Jun 2009, Oliver Neukum wrote: > Am Donnerstag, 11. Juni 2009 20:36:30 schrieb Alan Stern: > > > Or abstractly any power saving state that does autoresume in hardware. > > > In these cases you know that you can enter a powersaving state that > > > will add X latency. > > > > > > In terms of user space API we'll probably add a way for user space > > > to specify how much latency may be added for power management's sake. > > > If busses are stacked the "latency budget" has to be handled at core > > > level. If furthermore states that allow IO but with additional latency > > > are ignored, the budget will be calculated wrongly. > > > > Okay, fine. What does this have to do with Rafael's work? Why does > > setting the status to RPM_SUSPENDED even when a device is not in a > > low-power state preclude handling buses that automatically change their > > power state? > > For these cases the tree constraint does not apply. What tree constraint? You mean that the PM core shouldn't allow devices to suspend unless all their children are suspended? Why doesn't it still apply? Remember, when Rafael and I say "suspend" here, we don't mean "go to a low-power state". We mean "the PM core calls the runtime_suspend method". No matter what actions the link hardware may decide to take on its own, the PM core will still want to observe the all-children-suspended restriction when calling runtime_suspend methods. > I think there are devices who can be suspended while children are active > and devices which can not be. This is an attribute of the device and should > be evaluated by the core. Clearly it should be decided by the driver. Should there be a bit for it in the dev_pm_info structure? Alan Stern
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-12 2:16 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 199+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2009-06-06 22:54 [RFC][PATCH 0/2] PM: Rearrange core suspend code Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-06 22:55 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/2] PM: Separate suspend to RAM functionality from core Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-06 22:55 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-08 6:36 ` Pavel Machek 2009-06-08 6:36 ` Pavel Machek 2009-06-06 22:56 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/2] PM/Hibernate: Rename disk.c to hibernate.c Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-06 22:56 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-08 6:37 ` Pavel Machek 2009-06-08 6:37 ` Pavel Machek 2009-06-07 20:51 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/2] PM: Rearrange core suspend code Alan Stern 2009-06-07 20:51 ` [linux-pm] " Alan Stern 2009-06-07 21:46 ` Run-time PM idea (was: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/2] PM: Rearrange core suspend code) Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-07 21:46 ` Run-time PM idea (was: Re: [linux-pm] " Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-07 22:02 ` Run-time PM idea (was: " Oliver Neukum 2009-06-07 22:02 ` Run-time PM idea (was: Re: [linux-pm] " Oliver Neukum 2009-06-07 22:02 ` Oliver Neukum 2009-06-07 22:05 ` Run-time PM idea (was: " Oliver Neukum 2009-06-07 22:05 ` [linux-pm] " Oliver Neukum 2009-06-08 11:29 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-08 11:29 ` [linux-pm] " Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-08 12:04 ` Oliver Neukum 2009-06-08 18:34 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-09 7:25 ` Oliver Neukum 2009-06-09 7:25 ` [linux-pm] " Oliver Neukum 2009-06-09 14:33 ` Alan Stern 2009-06-09 14:33 ` [linux-pm] " Alan Stern 2009-06-09 14:33 ` Alan Stern 2009-06-09 14:48 ` Oliver Neukum 2009-06-09 14:48 ` Oliver Neukum 2009-06-09 14:48 ` Oliver Neukum 2009-06-09 22:44 ` [linux-pm] " Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-09 22:44 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-08 18:34 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-08 12:04 ` Oliver Neukum 2009-06-08 20:35 ` Alan Stern 2009-06-08 20:35 ` [linux-pm] " Alan Stern 2009-06-08 20:35 ` Alan Stern 2009-06-08 21:31 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-09 2:49 ` Alan Stern 2009-06-09 2:49 ` Alan Stern 2009-06-09 22:57 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-10 8:29 ` [patch update] " Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-10 8:29 ` [patch update] Re: [linux-pm] " Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-10 14:20 ` [patch update] " Oliver Neukum 2009-06-10 14:20 ` [patch update] Re: [linux-pm] " Oliver Neukum 2009-06-10 19:27 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-10 21:38 ` Oliver Neukum 2009-06-10 21:38 ` Oliver Neukum 2009-06-10 22:01 ` [patch update] " Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-10 22:01 ` [patch update] Re: [linux-pm] " Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-10 23:07 ` Oliver Neukum 2009-06-10 23:07 ` Oliver Neukum 2009-06-10 23:42 ` [patch update] " Alan Stern 2009-06-10 23:42 ` [patch update] Re: [linux-pm] " Alan Stern 2009-06-10 23:42 ` Alan Stern 2009-06-11 13:48 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-11 13:57 ` [patch update] " Oliver Neukum 2009-06-11 13:57 ` [patch update] Re: [linux-pm] " Oliver Neukum 2009-06-11 14:16 ` [patch update] " Alan Stern 2009-06-11 14:16 ` [patch update] Re: [linux-pm] " Alan Stern 2009-06-11 14:16 ` Alan Stern 2009-06-11 19:38 ` [patch update] " Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-11 19:38 ` [patch update] Re: [linux-pm] " Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-11 13:48 ` [patch update] " Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-11 13:46 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-11 13:46 ` [patch update] Re: [linux-pm] " Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-10 23:07 ` [patch update] " Oliver Neukum 2009-06-10 21:38 ` Oliver Neukum 2009-06-10 19:27 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-10 21:14 ` Alan Stern 2009-06-10 21:14 ` [patch update] Re: [linux-pm] " Alan Stern 2009-06-10 21:31 ` [patch update] " Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-10 21:31 ` [patch update] Re: [linux-pm] " Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-10 23:15 ` [patch update] " Oliver Neukum 2009-06-10 23:15 ` [patch update] Re: [linux-pm] " Oliver Neukum 2009-06-10 23:15 ` Oliver Neukum 2009-06-11 5:27 ` [patch update] " Magnus Damm 2009-06-11 5:27 ` [patch update] Re: [linux-pm] " Magnus Damm 2009-06-11 5:27 ` Magnus Damm 2009-06-10 23:42 ` Alan Stern 2009-06-11 14:17 ` [patch update] " Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-11 14:17 ` [patch update] Re: [linux-pm] " Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-11 14:52 ` [patch update] " Alan Stern 2009-06-11 14:52 ` [patch update] Re: [linux-pm] " Alan Stern 2009-06-11 15:06 ` Oliver Neukum 2009-06-11 15:06 ` Oliver Neukum 2009-06-11 15:22 ` Alan Stern 2009-06-11 15:22 ` Alan Stern 2009-06-11 16:05 ` Oliver Neukum 2009-06-11 16:05 ` Oliver Neukum 2009-06-11 18:36 ` [patch update] " Alan Stern 2009-06-11 18:36 ` [patch update] Re: [linux-pm] " Alan Stern 2009-06-11 18:36 ` Alan Stern 2009-06-11 21:05 ` [patch update] " Oliver Neukum 2009-06-11 21:05 ` [patch update] Re: [linux-pm] " Oliver Neukum 2009-06-11 21:05 ` Oliver Neukum 2009-06-12 2:16 ` Alan Stern [this message] 2009-06-12 2:16 ` Alan Stern 2009-06-12 8:15 ` Oliver Neukum 2009-06-12 14:32 ` [patch update] " Alan Stern 2009-06-12 14:32 ` [patch update] Re: [linux-pm] " Alan Stern 2009-06-12 14:32 ` Alan Stern 2009-06-12 19:09 ` [patch update] " Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-12 19:09 ` [patch update] Re: [linux-pm] " Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-12 19:48 ` Alan Stern 2009-06-12 19:56 ` [patch update] " Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-12 19:56 ` [patch update] Re: [linux-pm] " Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-12 21:23 ` Alan Stern 2009-06-12 23:06 ` [patch update] " Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-12 23:06 ` [patch update] Re: [linux-pm] " Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-13 18:08 ` [patch update] " Alan Stern 2009-06-13 18:08 ` [patch update] Re: [linux-pm] " Alan Stern 2009-06-13 22:04 ` [patch update] " Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-13 22:04 ` [patch update] Re: [linux-pm] " Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-12 21:23 ` [patch update] " Alan Stern 2009-06-12 19:48 ` Alan Stern 2009-06-12 8:15 ` Oliver Neukum 2009-06-12 2:16 ` Alan Stern 2009-06-11 16:05 ` Oliver Neukum 2009-06-11 15:22 ` Alan Stern 2009-06-11 15:06 ` Oliver Neukum 2009-06-11 19:43 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-11 19:43 ` [patch update] Re: [linux-pm] " Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-12 14:25 ` [patch update] " Alan Stern 2009-06-12 14:25 ` [patch update] Re: [linux-pm] " Alan Stern 2009-06-10 23:42 ` [patch update] " Alan Stern 2009-06-11 5:18 ` [patch update] Re: [linux-pm] " Magnus Damm 2009-06-11 5:18 ` Magnus Damm 2009-06-11 9:08 ` Oliver Neukum 2009-06-12 3:13 ` [patch update] " Magnus Damm 2009-06-12 3:13 ` [patch update] Re: [linux-pm] " Magnus Damm 2009-06-12 8:11 ` Oliver Neukum 2009-06-12 10:54 ` [patch update] " Magnus Damm 2009-06-12 10:54 ` [patch update] Re: [linux-pm] " Magnus Damm 2009-06-12 10:54 ` Magnus Damm 2009-06-12 8:11 ` [patch update] " Oliver Neukum 2009-06-11 9:08 ` Oliver Neukum 2009-06-11 5:18 ` Magnus Damm 2009-06-10 20:48 ` [linux-pm] " Alan Stern 2009-06-10 20:48 ` Alan Stern 2009-06-10 21:15 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-10 21:15 ` [linux-pm] " Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-10 20:48 ` Alan Stern 2009-06-09 22:57 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-09 2:49 ` Alan Stern 2009-06-09 7:31 ` [linux-pm] " Oliver Neukum 2009-06-09 7:31 ` Oliver Neukum 2009-06-09 23:02 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-09 23:02 ` [linux-pm] " Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-09 7:31 ` Oliver Neukum 2009-06-08 21:31 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-08 6:54 ` Ingo Molnar 2009-06-08 6:54 ` Run-time PM idea (was: Re: [linux-pm] " Ingo Molnar 2009-06-08 11:30 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2009-06-08 13:05 ` Ingo Molnar 2009-06-08 13:11 ` Matthew Garrett 2009-06-08 13:22 ` Run-time PM idea (was: " Ingo Molnar 2009-06-08 13:22 ` Run-time PM idea (was: Re: [linux-pm] " Ingo Molnar 2009-06-08 13:32 ` Matthew Garrett 2009-06-08 13:46 ` Run-time PM idea (was: " Ingo Molnar 2009-06-08 13:46 ` Run-time PM idea (was: Re: [linux-pm] " Ingo Molnar 2009-06-08 13:54 ` Run-time PM idea (was: " Matthew Garrett 2009-06-08 13:54 ` Run-time PM idea (was: Re: [linux-pm] " Matthew Garrett 2009-06-08 14:24 ` Run-time PM idea (was: " Ingo Molnar 2009-06-08 14:24 ` Run-time PM idea (was: Re: [linux-pm] " Ingo Molnar 2009-06-08 14:35 ` Run-time PM idea (was: " Matthew Garrett 2009-06-08 14:35 ` Run-time PM idea (was: Re: [linux-pm] " Matthew Garrett 2009-06-08 14:44 ` Run-time PM idea (was: " Ingo Molnar 2009-06-08 14:44 ` Run-time PM idea (was: Re: [linux-pm] " Ingo Molnar 2009-06-08 14:51 ` Matthew Garrett 2009-06-24 15:03 ` Run-time PM idea (was: " Pavel Machek 2009-06-24 15:03 ` Run-time PM idea (was: Re: [linux-pm] " Pavel Machek 2009-06-08 14:51 ` Run-time PM idea (was: " Matthew Garrett 2009-06-19 1:50 ` Robert Hancock 2009-06-19 1:50 ` Robert Hancock 2009-06-08 13:58 ` Oliver Neukum 2009-06-08 13:58 ` Run-time PM idea (was: Re: [linux-pm] " Oliver Neukum 2009-06-08 13:58 ` Oliver Neukum 2009-06-08 13:32 ` Run-time PM idea (was: " Matthew Garrett 2009-06-08 13:39 ` Oliver Neukum 2009-06-08 13:39 ` Run-time PM idea (was: Re: [linux-pm] " Oliver Neukum 2009-06-08 13:44 ` Run-time PM idea (was: " Matthew Garrett 2009-06-08 13:44 ` Run-time PM idea (was: Re: [linux-pm] " Matthew Garrett 2009-06-08 14:21 ` Ingo Molnar 2009-06-08 14:30 ` Matthew Garrett 2009-06-08 15:06 ` Run-time PM idea (was: " Ingo Molnar 2009-06-08 15:06 ` Run-time PM idea (was: Re: [linux-pm] " Ingo Molnar 2009-06-08 15:11 ` Matthew Garrett 2009-06-08 15:11 ` Run-time PM idea (was: " Matthew Garrett 2009-06-08 16:29 ` Ray Lee 2009-06-08 16:29 ` Run-time PM idea (was: Re: [linux-pm] " Ray Lee 2009-06-08 16:29 ` Ray Lee 2009-06-08 14:30 ` Run-time PM idea (was: " Matthew Garrett 2009-06-09 22:44 ` Jiri Kosina 2009-06-09 22:44 ` Run-time PM idea (was: Re: [linux-pm] " Jiri Kosina 2009-06-08 14:21 ` Run-time PM idea (was: " Ingo Molnar 2009-06-08 13:11 ` Matthew Garrett 2009-06-08 13:05 ` Ingo Molnar 2009-06-08 11:30 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0906112210340.21931-100000@netrider.rowland.org \ --to=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \ --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org \ --cc=oliver@neukum.org \ --cc=rjw@sisk.pl \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.