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 23:39:30 +0200 Message-ID: <20060911213930.GJ11901@elf.ucw.cz> References: <20060911210026.GG11901@elf.ucw.cz> 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: 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: Preece Scott-PREECE Cc: pm list List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On Mon 2006-09-11 17:36:33, Preece Scott-PREECE wrote: > = > > From: Pavel Machek [mailto:pavel@ucw.cz] = > > = > > > >>- PowerOP is only one layer (towards the bottom) in a power = > > > >>management solution. > > > >>- PowerOP does *not* replace cpufreq > > > > > > > >PowerOP provides userland interface for changing processor = > > frequency. = > > > >That's bad -- duplicate interface. > > > Basically the biggest problem with cpufreq interface is = > > that cpufreq = > > > has "chose predefined closest to a given frequency" functionality = > > > implemented in the kernel while there is _no_ any reason to = > > have this = > > > functionality implemented in the kernel if we have sysfs interface = > > > exported by PowerOP in place - you just > > = > > No, there is reason to keep that in kernel -- so that cpufreq = > > userspace interface can be kept, and so that resulting = > > kernel<->user interface is not ugly. > --- > = > Just as a data point, "keeping the cpufreq interface" is > irrelevant to a number of us, because we configure it out > of the system. I'm not really arguing that we should get > rid of an existing kernel interface, but I don't see any > reason why we shouldn't be able to have a separately > configurable interface if cpufreq doesn't meet our needs. Configurable interfaces are evil, and I do not think you can push such patch. You have developed your own little interface that suits your needs -- and that's fine -- but now you are trying to push it into mainline... and that is not, because those interfaces were not really designed to work together. Pavel -- = (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blo= g.html