From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dominik Brodowski Subject: Re: Re: [PATCHES] add _CST support Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 18:50:58 +0100 Message-ID: <20041228175058.GA8112@dominikbrodowski.de> References: <20041127215118.GA30309@dominikbrodowski.de> <1103694244.17325.58.camel@d845pe> <20041223000842.GA8289@dominikbrodowski.de> <1103778133.2567.45.camel@d845pe> <20041223130723.GE731@openzaurus.ucw.cz> <1104204434.18166.50.camel@d845pe> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1104204434.18166.50.camel@d845pe> Sender: acpi-devel-admin-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org Errors-To: acpi-devel-admin-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: To: Len Brown Cc: Pavel Machek , ACPI Developers , Robert Moore , Bruno Ducrot List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Dec 27, 2004 at 10:27:15PM -0500, Len Brown wrote: > On Thu, 2004-12-23 at 08:07, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > > C-states are enumerated C0...Cn > > > C-state types are enumerated C1, C2, C3. > > > I don't see any confusion in the name-space duplicates > > > as long as you know you're talking about C-states or C-state-types. > > > > > > > Unfortunately, people often don't know what they are talking about. > > Having two things called C2 is definitely going to confuse just > > about everyone but you... > > Probably we should not mess with the "well known" (hah;-) name space for > C-states themselves (C0...Cn). > > Types, on the other hand, would probably be well addressed with a enum > whose vales are 1,2,3 so if we chose to print them out they'd simply be > a %d -- using C%d only for actual C-states themselves. > > would that be better? I _still_ favour using C0 to C3 for the types, as the meaning of this is probably better known [e.g. the implications of C3 to bus mastering], and invent something new (like I0 to In for idle states?) and hope the ACPI specification group will like this naming and "clarify" it in ACPI 2./3.x However, I guess we do have to live with a broken ACPI specification in this regard... But it is an imperfect world, after all :-) Dominik ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/