From owner-freebsd-mobile@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Oct 30 07:55:50 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9924416A4CE for ; Thu, 30 Oct 2003 07:55:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from gs166.sp.cs.cmu.edu (GS166.SP.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.205.169]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DC72743F93 for ; Thu, 30 Oct 2003 07:55:49 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dpelleg@gs166.sp.cs.cmu.edu) Sender: dpelleg@gs166.sp.cs.cmu.edu To: Brad Karp References: <20031030145714.E6C1643FB1@mx1.FreeBSD.org> From: Dan Pelleg Date: 30 Oct 2003 10:55:25 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20031030145714.E6C1643FB1@mx1.FreeBSD.org> Message-ID: Lines: 37 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.1 (Cuyahoga Valley) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii cc: freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org Subject: Re: "deeper sleep mode" support in -STABLE? X-BeenThere: freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile computing with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 15:55:50 -0000 Brad Karp writes: > Hello, all. > > I read Marko Zec's post to -mobile with great interest: > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=176046+181234+/usr/local/www/db/text/2003/freebsd-mobile/20031019.freebsd-mobile > > This post offers a nifty patch to use the new "deeper sleep" mode supported > on P-III-M, IV-M, and "Centrino" Pentium Mobile processors. Marko reports > that he gets 18% additional battery life with the LCD on using this mode > vs. the "HLT" idle loop method used in -STABLE today, and 22% longer life > with the LCD off. > > The patch he posted: > > http://www.tel.fer.hr/zec/BSD/pm/4.8-ich-ds.patch > > Have others tried his patch and had good luck with it? I've got a ThinkPad > X31, and am considering giving it a go. I presume it will apply reasonably > cleanly to 4.9-RELEASE, though I've not tried yet. > > Also: are any committers looking at this patch for inclusion in either the > -STABLE or -CURRENT branches? (Or does ACPI achieve the same power savings > that this patch does?) > > Many thanks to Marko for passing this patch along! > > -Brad, bkarp@cs.cmu.edu The patch applies, but not cleanly, and doesn't compile. Marko told me in personal mail he's planning to work on -STABLE support. -- Dan Pelleg