1 Sep 2006 01:13
Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] ACPI: Idle Processor PM Improvements
Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas <at> hp.com>
2006-08-31 23:13:20 GMT
2006-08-31 23:13:20 GMT
On Wednesday 30 August 2006 13:43, Matthew Garrett wrote: > That would be helpful. For the One Laptop Per Child project (or whatever > it's called today), it would be advantageous to run without acpi. Out of curiosity, what is the motivation for running without acpi? It costs a lot to diverge from the mainstream in areas like that, so there must be a big payoff. But maybe if OLPC depends on acpi being smarter about power or code size or whatever, those improvements could be made and everybody would benefit. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo <at> vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
; I always do
line new toys...).
Even though the base machine may take only a couple watts of power
(Geode GX + the rest of the base logic), 2-3 watts is too much power to
use; a small child can generate only 7-10 watts. So if we want a decent
"learn" to "generate" ratio, we have to do better than the 2-4 to 1
ratio we might get conventionally. In January, we saw this staring us
in the face, and knew we had to do better, or we'd have just told a good
fraction of the kids in the world they can't have the advantages of a
computer. Our goal has always been a 10 to 1 ratio, for at least the
most important use cases (e.g. reading).
RSS Feed