From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pavel Machek Subject: Re: community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP [Was: Re: So, what's the status on the recent patches here?] Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 10:20:25 +0200 Message-ID: <20060911082025.GD1898@elf.ucw.cz> References: <450516E8.9010403@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <450516E8.9010403@gmail.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-pm-bounces@lists.osdl.org Errors-To: linux-pm-bounces@lists.osdl.org To: "Eugeny S. Mints" Cc: pm list , scott.preece@motorola.com List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org Hi! On Mon 2006-09-11 11:57:28, Eugeny S. Mints wrote: > [snip] > >> Are you arguing that the cpufreq interface be morphed to support power > >> op applications? > > > > No. I'm arguing that > > > > * cpufreq interface should be used for changing cpu frequency > the patch set i sent out has cpufreq used for changing cpu frequency, > hasn't it? I was talking about kernel<->user interface. You did echo low > something to change CPU frequency, IIRC. > can we eventually start talking more close to the code rather than > speculating without it? Lets get kernel<->user interface right, first. You'll need to create Documentation/ entries for your interfaces, eventually, so lets do that, first, and then talk about code. Oh and it would be nice to cc lkml on that document, too. New kernel<->user interface is not decision taken lightly. Pavel -- = (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blo= g.html