From: Geoff Levand <geoffrey.levand@am.sony.com>
To: Todd Poynor <tpoynor@mvista.com>
Cc: cpufreq@lists.linux.org.uk, linux-pm@lists.osdl.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] PowerOP 1/3: PowerOP core
Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2005 09:07:33 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <42F8D4C5.2090800@am.sony.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050809025157.GB25064@slurryseal.ddns.mvista.com>
Todd Poynor wrote:
...
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.12.orig/include/linux/powerop.h 1970-01-01
> 00:00:00.000000000 +0000
> +++ linux-2.6.12/include/linux/powerop.h 2005-08-03
> 01:10:55.000000000 +0000
> @@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
> +/*
> + * PowerOP core definitions
> + *
> + * Author: Todd Poynor <tpoynor@mvista.com>
> + *
> + * 2005 (c) MontaVista Software, Inc. This file is licensed under
> + * the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2. This program
> + * is licensed "as is" without any warranty of any kind, whether
> express
> + * or implied.
> + */
> +
> +#ifndef __POWEROP_H__
> +#define __POWEROP_H__
> +
> +#include <linux/kobject.h>
> +#include <asm/powerop.h>
> +
> +struct powerop_point {
> + int param[POWEROP_DRIVER_MAX_PARAMS];
> +};
I'm wondering if anything could be gained by having the whole
struct powerop_point defined in asm/powerop.h, and treat it as an
opaque structure at this level. That way, things other than just
ints could be passed between the policy manager and the backend,
although I guess that breaks the beauty of the simplicity and would
complicate the sys-fs interface, etc. I'm interested to hear your
comments.
Another point is that a policy manager would need to poll the system
and/or get events and then act. Your powerop work here only provides
a (one way) piece of the final action. Any comments regarding a more
general interface?
-Geoff
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Geoff Levand <geoffrey.levand@am.sony.com>
To: Todd Poynor <tpoynor@mvista.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@lists.osdl.org,
cpufreq@lists.linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] PowerOP 1/3: PowerOP core
Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2005 09:07:33 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <42F8D4C5.2090800@am.sony.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050809025157.GB25064@slurryseal.ddns.mvista.com>
Todd Poynor wrote:
...
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.12.orig/include/linux/powerop.h 1970-01-01
> 00:00:00.000000000 +0000
> +++ linux-2.6.12/include/linux/powerop.h 2005-08-03
> 01:10:55.000000000 +0000
> @@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
> +/*
> + * PowerOP core definitions
> + *
> + * Author: Todd Poynor <tpoynor@mvista.com>
> + *
> + * 2005 (c) MontaVista Software, Inc. This file is licensed under
> + * the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2. This program
> + * is licensed "as is" without any warranty of any kind, whether
> express
> + * or implied.
> + */
> +
> +#ifndef __POWEROP_H__
> +#define __POWEROP_H__
> +
> +#include <linux/kobject.h>
> +#include <asm/powerop.h>
> +
> +struct powerop_point {
> + int param[POWEROP_DRIVER_MAX_PARAMS];
> +};
I'm wondering if anything could be gained by having the whole
struct powerop_point defined in asm/powerop.h, and treat it as an
opaque structure at this level. That way, things other than just
ints could be passed between the policy manager and the backend,
although I guess that breaks the beauty of the simplicity and would
complicate the sys-fs interface, etc. I'm interested to hear your
comments.
Another point is that a policy manager would need to poll the system
and/or get events and then act. Your powerop work here only provides
a (one way) piece of the final action. Any comments regarding a more
general interface?
-Geoff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-08-09 16:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-08-09 2:51 PowerOP 1/3: PowerOP core Todd Poynor
2005-08-09 7:32 ` Greg KH
2005-08-09 7:32 ` Greg KH
2005-08-09 16:07 ` Geoff Levand [this message]
2005-08-09 16:07 ` [linux-pm] " Geoff Levand
2005-08-10 0:33 ` Todd Poynor
2005-08-10 0:33 ` [linux-pm] " Todd Poynor
2005-08-10 13:58 ` Daniel Petrini
2005-08-10 13:58 ` Daniel Petrini
2005-08-11 0:25 ` Todd Poynor
2005-08-11 0:25 ` Todd Poynor
2005-08-12 16:23 ` david-b
2005-08-13 1:06 ` Todd Poynor
2005-08-13 1:06 ` [linux-pm] " Todd Poynor
2005-08-12 16:23 ` david-b
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=42F8D4C5.2090800@am.sony.com \
--to=geoffrey.levand@am.sony.com \
--cc=cpufreq@lists.linux.org.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@lists.osdl.org \
--cc=tpoynor@mvista.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.