From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pavel Machek Subject: Re: suspend and hibernate nomenclature Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 20:40:22 +0000 Message-ID: <20060516204021.GA5846@ucw.cz> References: <1147024930.16057.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200605081647.55275.david-b@pacbell.net> <1147160320.2120.10.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200605090857.07853.david-b@pacbell.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============9760689596277532==" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <200605090857.07853.david-b@pacbell.net> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-pm-bounces@lists.osdl.org Errors-To: linux-pm-bounces@lists.osdl.org To: David Brownell Cc: linux-pm@lists.osdl.org, richard@hughsie.com List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org --===============9760689596277532== Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Hi! > Of course what I _would_ like to see is Linux distros that autosuspend, > entering "standby" after they're idle for a while and then, if they're > not woken up quickly enough, entering "suspend-to-RAM". No point in > having laptops burn all that energy all the time, after all ... or > automagically inflicting long resume-from-STR latencies on them. Actually, it is quite hard to decide when it is okay to suspend machine. You do not want it to fall asleep during compilation/cd burning/download. > > If you guys used a sleep name in the kernel > > sleep_for_not_longer_than_6_minutes_but_more_that_2_seconds() I really > > don't mind -- but if the user has to click a button, I would rather the > > button was marked suspend or hibernate :-) > > Well "not_longer_yadda_yadda()" would be a bizarre model. The user-visible > issue is the latency to suspend or resume ... where "standby" is quick, and > "suspend-to-RAM" is relatively slow. Where "quick" is on the order of time > for users to finish switching their mental context, while "slow" is on the > order of doing that _plus_ doing something else to fill the wait time. How > long the system stays in a given suspend state is immaterial to any issue > beyond how much power is saved. (Which is only indirectly user visible, > e.g. stretching battery life out one more hour vs eight more.) Well, entering/exiting s2ram eats more power than idle; so if you expect to sleep 4 seconds, it is probably best to do nothing, maybe enter standby if you are fast. 4sec idle: 4 sec at 10W 4sec s2ram: 2 sec entering s2ram at 15W, 0 sec sleep, 2 sec exiting s2ram at 15W. bad 4sec standby: 1sec enter standby at 15W, 2 sec sleep at 5W, 1 sec exit standby at 15W Pavel -- Thanks for all the (sleeping) penguins. --===============9760689596277532== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline --===============9760689596277532==--