From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8) Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 12:32:46 +0200 Message-ID: <1274869966.5882.5262.camel@twins> References: <1274482015-30899-1-git-send-email-arve@android.com> <201005242049.18920.rjw@sisk.pl> <87wrusvrqe.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> <201005250138.16293.rjw@sisk.pl> <1274863655.5882.4875.camel@twins> <1274867106.5882.5090.camel@twins> <1274868593.5882.5185.camel@twins> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Arve =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hj=F8nnev=E5g?= Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Kevin Hilman , felipe.balbi@nokia.com, Linux PM , LKML , Linux OMAP Mailing List , Tony Lindgren , Paul Walmsley List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2010-05-26 at 03:25 -0700, Arve Hj=C3=B8nnev=C3=A5g wrote: > and on systems where the > same power state can be used from idle and suspend, we use suspend so > we can stay in the low power state for minutes to hours instead of > milliseconds to seconds. So don't you think working on making it possible for systems to be idle _that_ long would improve things for everybody? as opposed to this auto-suspend which only improves matters for those that (can) use it?