From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Garrett Subject: Re: [linux-pm] Power management minisummit at Linux Plumbers Conference (November 3-5) Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 21:34:31 +0100 Message-ID: <20100803203431.GA2969@srcf.ucam.org> References: <20100803182746.GA32276@srcf.ucam.org> <4C587C80.3040207@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4C587C80.3040207@ti.com> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Mike Turquette Cc: "linux-pm@lists.osdl.org" , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 03, 2010 at 03:30:56PM -0500, Mike Turquette wrote: > That link did not really work for me, but I think I found the right > place after a few clicks. Oops! The link should have been http://www.linuxplumbersconf.org/2010/ocw/events/LPC2010MC/proposals . > Just FYI, I proposed a discussion on the issues that create such a large > power gap between a CPUIdle-only system and a system with suspend (with > the assumption that the lowest C-state can be hit by both). > > I don't really want to present a formal lecture on it, but it would be > nice to discuss with the group what can be done to shrink that gap a > little in kernel space (badly behaving timers in platform-independent > code) and in userspace (power-aware timers, coalescing timers, etc). That sounds great. The idea is to be fairly discussion-oriented, perhaps with a short presentation to cover the outline of the issue, so this kind of topic is ideal. Thanks, -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org