From: Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@nokia.com>
To: ext Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>
Cc: ipw2100-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-pm@lists.osdl.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Runtime power management on ipw2100
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 11:13:07 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1170234787.6746.22.camel@amit-laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070131075249.GA22115@srcf.ucam.org>
On Wed, 2007-01-31 at 07:52 +0000, ext Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Based on previous discussions, I've implemented a rough attempt at
> providing some level of basic runtime power management on the ipw2100
> chipset. This patch does the following:
>
> 1) On load, it initialises the hardware and then quiesces it again
> 2) On interface up, it powers the hardware back up
> 3) On interface down, it powers the hardware down and puts the chip in
> D3
> 4) It attempts to behave correctly over suspend/resume - ie, if the
> interface was down beforehand, it will ensure that the chip is powered
> down
This isn't quite runtime power management in my way of thinking. I sort
of expected this to be a fundamental characteristic of well-behaved
drivers, but then I don't have too much experience with PCI on x86
platforms.
With runtime power management, I would try to put the device into low
power states when it is UP. That's what drivers on the OMAP platform
(N800, 770) do.
What is the latency in changing between different PCI power states for
peripherals?
Would it be possible e.g. to put the peripheral into a low power state
after each Tx/Rx (with reasonable hyteresis)?
<snip>
> The situation is slightly more complicated for wired interfaces. As
> previously discussed, we potentially want three interface states (on,
> low power, off) with the intermediate one powering down as much of the
> hardware as possible while still implementing link detection.
And this low power state is what the HW should be in all the time,
except when it has work to do.
Regards,
Amit
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-01-31 9:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-01-31 7:52 [RFC] Runtime power management on ipw2100 Matthew Garrett
2007-01-31 9:13 ` Amit Kucheria [this message]
2007-01-31 9:48 ` [linux-pm] " Matthew Garrett
2007-01-31 11:04 ` Amit Kucheria
2007-01-31 11:13 ` Andi Kleen
2007-01-31 10:27 ` [linux-pm] " Matthew Garrett
2007-01-31 10:48 ` Andi Kleen
2007-01-31 11:53 ` Amit Kucheria
2007-01-31 13:04 ` Pavel Machek
2007-01-31 13:12 ` [linux-pm] " Oliver Neukum
2007-01-31 13:13 ` samuel
2007-01-31 13:24 ` Amit Kucheria
2007-01-31 13:44 ` [linux-pm] " Pavel Machek
2007-01-31 14:11 ` Matthew Garrett
2007-01-31 10:39 ` Pavel Machek
2007-02-01 1:47 ` [Ipw2100-devel] " Zhu Yi
2007-02-06 21:44 ` Matthew Garrett
2007-02-08 9:01 ` Zhu Yi
2007-02-19 21:08 ` [linux-pm] [Ipw2100-devel] " David Brownell
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=1170234787.6746.22.camel@amit-laptop \
--to=amit.kucheria@nokia.com \
--cc=ipw2100-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-pm@lists.osdl.org \
--cc=mjg59@srcf.ucam.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox