[linux-pm] Runtime PM discussion notes

[Arve Hjønnevåg]

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Paul Walmsley <paul at pwsan.com> wrote:
...
>
> As I understand it, in the original Android implementation, the hardware
> that they were using didn't have fine-grained power management.  So
> system-wide suspend made more sense in that context.  But that shouldn't
> be confused with the modern rationale for wakelocks:
>
> https://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/linux-pm/2010-May/025668.html
>
> "On the hardware that shipped we enter the same power state from idle
> and suspend, so the only power savings we get from suspend that we
> don't get in idle is from not respecting the scheduler and timers."
>

This is no longer the case. Both the Nexus-S and Xoom enter lower
power states from suspend than idle.

-- 
Arve Hjønnevåg