How to facilitate the cpuidle drivers to go to the same direction (Was: Re: [PATCH 4/9] ARM: OMAP4: cpuidle: fix wrong driver initialization)

[benh@kernel.crashing.org (Benjamin Herrenschmidt)]

On Mon, 2013-04-01 at 11:35 +0530, Deepthi Dharwar wrote:
> But then, this means we get all the
> arch specific code out under drivers/cpuidle
> which can be very messy.

Not really no. We already have that here or there in other drivers,
it's not necessarily messy and the stuff like that can generally be made
reasonably self contained.

The main issue is that if I (powerpc) wants a fix in my
some_ppc_box_idle.c driver, especially if it needs to sync with other
arch changes, having to sync/ack with Rafael might complicate things a
bit (though not necessarily a lot).

I would probably keep the liberty of sending to Linus directly urgent
bug/regression fixes to individual cpuidle drivers relating to our archs
without waiting every now and then if for example Rafael is on
vacation :-)

>  Also instances where the changes
> are specifically tied only to the  architecture of the back-end driver
> (SoC specific), it is absolutely necessary to get SoC maintainer's
> review.

Ben.