Re: Re: Linux ACPI processor driver patch: user-definable power state limit

[Len Brown <len.brown-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>]

On Fri, 2004-11-05 at 17:54, Dominik Brodowski wrote:

> That sounds to be quite racy. Multiple callers will get confused.
> You probably need a
> 

comitted design defect;-)

Yeah, James mentioned this too and suggested he send in a pci_dev
from the ipw2100 driver.  But I didn't think this workaround
justified the complexity.

After all, 99% of the time it will be not used.
the other 99% of 1% the time it is used, it will be used
only at module load/init time.

but if you're excited about enhancing it,
please go ahead.  I do want to lock down the driver API
ASAP, however, since james needs to release his driver.

> Other than that, the current "limit" interface to processor.c seems to
> be
> pretty much useless as P-States aren't really handled.

right, this doesn't have anything to do with p-states.
if we need that too, fine, but we need an api we
can use for c-states locked now.

thanks,
-Len




-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Sybase ASE Linux Express Edition - download now for FREE
LinuxWorld Reader's Choice Award Winner for best database on Linux.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=5588&alloc_id=12065&op=click