On Tue, 2007-02-13 at 05:31 -0800, Venkatesh Pallipadi wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 08:22:01PM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 10:39:25AM -0800, Venkatesh Pallipadi wrote:
> > >
> > > Introducing 'cpuidle', a new CPU power management infrastructure to
> > manage
> > >
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 08:22:01PM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 10:39:25AM -0800, Venkatesh Pallipadi wrote:
> >
> > Introducing 'cpuidle', a new CPU power management infrastructure to manage
> > idle CPUs in a clean and efficient manner.
> > cpuidle separates out the dri
> The only differentiator that I can think of would be latency, but that seems
> to be a) covered in a different tunable, and b) probably wouldn't affect
> most people enough where it matters.
>
and for latency the kernel already has a policy thing that tracks the
maximum latency allowed if
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 10:39:25AM -0800, Venkatesh Pallipadi wrote:
>
> Introducing 'cpuidle', a new CPU power management infrastructure to manage
> idle CPUs in a clean and efficient manner.
> cpuidle separates out the drivers that can provide support for multiple types
> of idle states and
4 matches
Mail list logo
