From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg KH 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 20:26:37 -0700 Message-ID: <20060912032637.GA27397@kroah.com> References: <450516E8.9010403@gmail.com> <20060911082025.GD1898@elf.ucw.cz> <450530BD.8090101@gmail.com> <20060911193637.GA11901@elf.ucw.cz> <20060911200636.GC11901@elf.ucw.cz> <991df5640aa53989f0801feecf46c979@nomadgs.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: <991df5640aa53989f0801feecf46c979@nomadgs.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: Matthew Locke Cc: Preece Scott-PREECE , Pavel Machek , pm list List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 01:25:42PM -0700, Matthew Locke wrote: > On Sep 11, 2006, at 1:06 PM, Pavel Machek wrote: > >And IIRC Greg's last question was "what is it good > >for?". > = > That was a long time ago and again many people from the embedded = > community have provided lots of answers. I'm still not convinced. You can't break the current cpufreq interface, and to claim that it is irrelevant is just ignoring 95% of the Linux market right now :) So, you all better work with the cpufreq people, otherwise this code is going to go nowhere. I'm with Pavel here, in my opinion, he is correct. thanks, greg k-h