Re: [PATCH 4/4] USB: export autosuspend delay in sysfs
Alan Stern <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.usb.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Fri, 9 Mar 2007, Oliver Neukum wrote: > Am Donnerstag, 8. März 2007 16:57 schrieb Alan Stern: > > On Thu, 8 Mar 2007, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > > > > > All right, maybe it wouldn't if you did it for a short time -- but then > > > > what would be the point? Surely if you want to power down the network > > > > interface and leave it that way, you must realize that you can't keep > > > > live sessions bound to the interface. > > > > > > Why? A full suspension of the system does that and we should seek > > > to be able to do the same. > > > > What happens when the opposite end of a network connection tries to send > > data to a suspended system? Yes, TCP is pretty aggressive about retries, > > but doesn't it eventually give up? > > Sure, eventually. Nothing is perfect. Suspension will cost performance > and/or functionality. Is that reason not to limit that loss? I'm still not sure how good an idea it is. But let's say we do it. Then the new power/level attribute file would have 4 possible values: on, auto, suspend, and suspend-without-autoresume Can you can think up a better name for that last value? Bear in mind that even though autoresume might be disabled, remote wakeup could still be enabled since it is controlled by a different attribute. Alan Stern ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ [email protected] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel