Re: [PATCH] PowerOP, PowerOP Core, 1/2

[Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>]

Hi!
> >Well, two objections to that
> >
> >a) current powerop code does not handle 256 CPU machine, because that
> >would need 256 independend bundles, and powerop has hardcoded "only
> >one bundle" rule.
> 
> The 256 is only a temporary implementation limitation.

Really? 256 CPUs mean 2^256 states. How do you handle that without
introducing vectors?

> >b) having some devices controlled by powerop and some by specific
> >subsystem is indeed ugly. I'd hope powerop would cover all the
> >devices. (Or maybe cover _no_ devices). Userland should not need to
> >know if touchscreen is part of SoC or if it happens to be independend
> >on given machine.
> 
> PowerOP does *not* cover devices.  It covers system level parameters 
> such clocks, buses, voltages.

I've seen "usb enabled" in one of examples.. and that sure seems like
device to me.
								Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html