> On 7 December 2011 10:57, Serghei Amelian <serghei@...> wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> I need some opinions about features provided by Power Management System. >> So far I implemented a battery monitor and backlight control. Now, I >> want >> to >> debate about: > > 1) Governors. KPowersave come with governor controller, but a guy from > #udev >> irc channel adviced me that is actually is not necessary to implement it >> in a >> gui interface, because actually we don't want to change governors but we >> need >> to burn less energy. >> >> Check this "good practices" guide: >> http://www.codon.org.uk/~mjg59/power/good_practices.html >> > > Again, a power manager needs to manage the power. There are probably > situtations where people want to use powersave or use performance, either > way the power manager should allow me to adjust my CPU state. > > >> 2) DPMS and screensavers. In my opinion, DPMS control should be passed >> to >> screensaver, not to be controlled by power manager. >> >> Why? I think that Power Manager should react only to events related to >> power >> supplies (like AC adapter plugged in, AC unplugged, battery low, etc) or >> ACPI >> events like "lid closed", "power button pressed", etc. >> > > Right and these things need to load different profiles which are preset. > > >> Shutting down the monitor when the user is away from keyboard is not >> exactly >> related to power management, seem natural to be a part of screensaver. >> >> Opinions? Ideas? > > > I think you have the wrong idea. "power management" refers to managing the > power usage and controls things that change this. DPMS (aka power display > for monitors) should belong here. Laptop Screens and Monitors both pull an > enormous amount of power and it is up to the power manager to utilize this > appropriately. Not to mention the power manager is required to set > different profiles to control my screen settings. > > if the screensaver had to do this, then the screen saver would end up > reimplementing the profiles and make it an enormous PITA. > > the reason HAL was great is because it allowed me to manage all of my > power > needs from a single library. I don't understand why this was bad. As long > as the library or application is well written, there is no reason we > shouldn't implement all the things we need. that means we need DPMS and > CPU > freq settings and backlight and more. why? because they are all power > related functions. > Calvin is correct. All the features in kpowersave need to be available from its replacement, or we will be stuck with HAL forever. ;-) I use the ability to change the CPU governer all the time. I like to think I am smarter than the computer and know more precisely when I need high speed and "snappiness" versus long battery life. Tim