Re: 2.6.13-rc3 Battery times at 100/250/1000 Hz = Zero difference

[Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>]

Brown, Len wrote:
>  
> 
>>>>Digging up this patch from last month regarding C2
>>>>on a AMD K7 implies
>>>>that the whole blame can be put on kernel acpi:
>>>>
>>>>http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=111933745131301&w=2
> 
> 
> The current Linus tree includes generic ACPI support
> for deep C-states on SMP machines. (deep means higher than C1)
> 
> I don't have any problem with people having platform specific
> modules to handle platform specific features.  However, if
> the system really intends to support SMP ACPI C-states deeper
> than C1 and the generic ACPI code doesn't support it,
> then it is either a Linux/ACPI bug or a BIOS bug -- file away:-)
> 
> I.e. The whole concept of ACPI is that you shoulud _not_ need
> a platform specific driver to accomplish this.

Is anyone but me interested in low power states for servers? I have 
several groups of servers which are lightly utilized for at least 12 
hours every day and on weekends. I currently use IDE drives so I can 
spin them down when idle, do logging either to a single drive or over 
the network whichever makes the most sense, and any drop in power use 
saves double, since I pay for the server power and the A/C power as well.

I haven't seen much discussion of this, but in many cases it would 
result in a saving, perhaps fairly large. Some environmental benefit as 
well, of course.

-- 
    -bill davidsen (davidsen@tmr.com)
"The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the
  last possible moment - but no longer"  -me