On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 10:14:28AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> >+2. Many architectures will place dyntick-idle CPUs into deep sleep
> >+ states, which further degrades from-idle transition latencies.
> >+
> I think this part should just be deleted.
> On x86, the deeper idle states are even used with non-tickless system (the
> break even times are
> quite a bit less than even 1 msec).
> I can't imagine that ARM is worse on this, at which point the statement above
> is highly dubious
Interesting point, and I freely admit that I don't have full knowledge
of the energy-consumption characteristics of all the architectures that
Linux supports. Adding a few of the ARM guys on CC for their take,
plus linux-rt-users.
If there are no objections, I will delete point 2 above as Arjan suggests.
Thanx, Paul
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
