Re: [uClinux-dev] Kernel 2.6 size increase
From: Alan Cox (alan_at_lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk)
Date: 07/30/03
- Previous message: dean gaudet: "Re: 2.6.0-test2 has i8042 mux problems"
- In reply to: Tom Rini: "Re: [uClinux-dev] Kernel 2.6 size increase"
- Next in thread: Tom Rini: "Re: [uClinux-dev] Kernel 2.6 size increase"
- Reply: Tom Rini: "Re: [uClinux-dev] Kernel 2.6 size increase"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
To: Tom Rini <trini@kernel.crashing.org> Date: 29 Jul 2003 23:48:10 +0100
On Maw, 2003-07-29 at 23:29, Tom Rini wrote:
>
> Well, from Pat's talk at OLS, it seems like sysfs would be an important
> part of 'sleep', which is something at least some embedded systems care
> about.
sysfs is relevant for bigger systems but for small embedded stuff the whole
PM layer is fairly "so what". At that level your hardware is tightly defined
and you *know* the power management ordering. Policy becomes critical for
performance and gets done at a very fine grained level - things like waking
up the flash for a read then turning it back off on a timer for example.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Previous message: dean gaudet: "Re: 2.6.0-test2 has i8042 mux problems"
- In reply to: Tom Rini: "Re: [uClinux-dev] Kernel 2.6 size increase"
- Next in thread: Tom Rini: "Re: [uClinux-dev] Kernel 2.6 size increase"
- Reply: Tom Rini: "Re: [uClinux-dev] Kernel 2.6 size increase"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|