From: "Eugeny S. Mints" <eugeny.mints@gmail.com>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: pm list <linux-pm@lists.osdl.org>,
Preece Scott-PREECE <scott.preece@motorola.com>
Subject: Re: community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP [Was: Re: So, what's the status on the recent patches here?]
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 00:53:46 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4505CCDA.8020501@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060911195546.GB11901@elf.ucw.cz>
Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> I know its confusing having oppoint (from Dave Singleton) and powerop
>> being discussed at the same time. However, I believe we (PowerOP)
>> have
>
> Yes, it is.
>
>> - 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
_have_ to keep all possible functionality out of the kernel. CPufreq interface
is just subset of sysfs interface provided by PowerOP and _must_ be implemented
in userspace on top of sysfs interface - this is the proper way to scape
duplication. Such issue with cpufreq<->kernel userspace interface is consequence
of the fact that cpufreq implements incorrect design of PM stack layers and
interfaces. PowerOP solves this issues as well.
>
>> - The PowerOP interface was discussed in detail on this list and we
>> haven't heard any negative comments.
>
> Eh? Was I on different list?vb dfgdfv
>
>> - We are not advocating the integration with sleep states. We want to
>> get the PowerOP interface accepted and then we can build on it.
>
> Good.
>
>> We have a few more comments from Greg to take care of and we can add a
>> Documentation/ file. Then I think its time to get the PowerOP patches
>> in the queue for acceptance. Any comments about this?
>
> Well, you'll only get good interface review when you have
> Documentation/ , and it needs to go to lkml before it goes to any
> queues.
PM stack is too complex and heavy part to go in such pieces thru lkml. i expect
all linux pm experts to be on this list
Eugeny
> Pavel
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-09-11 20:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 139+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-09-11 7:57 community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP [Was: Re: So, what's the status on the recent patches here?] Eugeny S. Mints
2006-09-11 8:20 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-11 9:47 ` Eugeny S. Mints
2006-09-11 19:36 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-11 19:53 ` Matthew Locke
2006-09-11 20:06 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-11 20:09 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-11 20:33 ` Matthew Locke
2006-09-11 21:06 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-11 21:50 ` Matthew Locke
2006-09-11 22:50 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-12 3:31 ` Greg KH
2006-09-12 8:26 ` Matthew Locke
2006-09-13 4:22 ` David Brownell
2006-09-11 20:25 ` Matthew Locke
2006-09-11 21:02 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-12 3:26 ` Greg KH
2006-09-11 22:00 ` Mark Gross
2006-09-11 22:08 ` Matthew Locke
2006-09-11 20:24 ` Eugeny S. Mints
2006-09-11 20:34 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-13 4:54 ` David Brownell
2006-09-13 11:39 ` Preece Scott-PREECE
2006-09-14 9:12 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-14 9:16 ` Vitaly Wool
2006-09-14 9:20 ` Matthew Locke
2006-09-14 10:05 ` Eugeny S. Mints
2006-09-14 10:17 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-14 10:47 ` Eugeny S. Mints
2006-09-14 12:15 ` Vitaly Wool
2006-09-14 13:03 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-14 13:04 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-14 13:15 ` Vitaly Wool
2006-09-14 13:20 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-14 13:26 ` Vitaly Wool
2006-09-14 14:59 ` David Brownell
2006-09-17 10:53 ` Amit Kucheria
2006-09-17 13:18 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-17 13:28 ` Amit Kucheria
2006-09-17 13:40 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-17 14:14 ` Amit Kucheria
2006-09-17 18:25 ` community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP[Was: " Preece Scott-PREECE
2006-09-18 9:02 ` community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP [Was: " Pavel Machek
2006-09-14 14:56 ` David Brownell
2006-09-17 12:34 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-17 13:06 ` Vitaly Wool
2006-09-18 10:46 ` Amit Kucheria
2006-09-18 10:53 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-18 12:01 ` Igor Stoppa
2006-09-18 12:11 ` nokia 770 [was Re: community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP [Was: Re: So, what's the status on the recent patches here?]] Pavel Machek
2006-09-18 12:42 ` Amit Kucheria
2006-09-19 18:25 ` Pavel Machek
2006-12-12 20:00 ` nokia 770 [was Re: community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP] David Brownell
2006-12-13 12:12 ` Eugeny S. Mints
2006-12-13 21:03 ` Pavel Machek
2006-12-13 21:32 ` David Brownell
2006-12-13 21:44 ` Matthew Locke
2006-12-13 21:53 ` Dave Jones
2006-12-13 22:50 ` Matthew Locke
2006-12-13 22:58 ` Dave Jones
2006-12-14 10:14 ` Dmitry Krivoschekov
2006-12-14 12:12 ` Dave Jones
2006-12-14 13:01 ` Vitaly Wool
2006-12-14 13:17 ` Dave Jones
2006-12-14 14:56 ` Pavel Machek
2006-12-14 15:22 ` Dmitry Krivoschekov
2006-12-13 22:55 ` nokia 770 [was Re: community PM requirements...] David Brownell
2006-12-13 21:56 ` nokia 770 [was Re: community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP] Eugeny S. Mints
2006-12-13 21:58 ` Pavel Machek
2006-12-13 22:27 ` nokia 770 [was Re: community PM requirements...] David Brownell
2006-12-13 21:27 ` nokia 770 [was Re: community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP] Matthew Locke
2006-09-14 19:25 ` community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP [Was: Re: So, what's the status on the recent patches here?] Jon Loeliger
2006-09-17 12:46 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-17 17:32 ` Preece Scott-PREECE
2006-09-19 18:20 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-19 19:11 ` Preece Scott-PREECE
2006-09-23 23:39 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-14 12:12 ` Vitaly Wool
2006-09-14 12:35 ` Eugeny S. Mints
2006-09-14 9:32 ` PowerOP on lkml or linux-pm? Matthew Locke
2006-09-14 9:45 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-14 9:58 ` Matthew Locke
2006-09-14 9:47 ` community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP [Was: Re: So, what's the status on the recent patches here?] Matthew Locke
2006-09-11 19:30 ` Matthew Locke
2006-09-11 19:55 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-11 20:53 ` Eugeny S. Mints [this message]
2006-09-11 21:00 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-11 21:36 ` Preece Scott-PREECE
2006-09-11 21:39 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-11 22:41 ` Eugeny S. Mints
2006-09-11 23:05 ` cpufreq user<->kernel interface removal [was Re: community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP] Pavel Machek
2006-09-11 23:50 ` Mark Gross
2006-09-12 3:35 ` Greg KH
2006-09-12 8:41 ` Matthew Locke
2006-09-12 17:03 ` Jon Loeliger
2006-09-14 16:26 ` Mark Gross
2006-09-17 12:37 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-17 13:10 ` Vitaly Wool
2006-09-17 13:20 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-11 22:05 ` community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP [Was: Re: So, what's the status on the recent patches here?] Eugeny S. Mints
2006-09-11 22:56 ` cpufreq terminally broken [was Re: community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP] Pavel Machek
2006-09-12 0:17 ` Mark Gross
2006-09-12 3:37 ` Greg KH
2006-09-13 23:50 ` [linux-pm] " David Singleton
2006-09-14 5:30 ` Vitaly Wool
2006-09-14 5:55 ` OpPoint summary Greg KH
2006-09-14 7:35 ` Vitaly Wool
2006-09-14 16:55 ` David Singleton
2006-09-14 17:03 ` David Singleton
2006-09-14 17:07 ` David Singleton
2006-09-14 17:25 ` Auke Kok
2006-09-14 18:15 ` [linux-pm] " Vitaly Wool
2006-09-14 18:17 ` David Singleton
2006-09-17 17:48 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-18 14:33 ` [linux-pm] " Richard A. Griffiths
2006-09-18 16:13 ` Matthew Locke
2006-09-14 17:11 ` David Singleton
2006-09-17 5:07 ` David Singleton
2006-09-17 12:56 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-17 12:58 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-17 22:43 ` [linux-pm] " Matthew Locke
2007-02-27 20:55 ` cpufreq terminally broken [was Re: community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP] David Brownell
2007-02-27 22:41 ` Matthew Locke
2006-09-12 8:33 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-12 9:10 ` Vitaly Wool
2006-09-12 9:16 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-12 9:23 ` [linux-pm] " Vitaly Wool
2006-09-14 15:04 ` Mark Gross
2006-09-14 14:58 ` Mark Gross
2006-10-05 3:30 ` community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP [Was: Re: So, what's the status on the recent patches here?] Dominik Brodowski
2006-09-11 21:53 ` Mark Gross
2006-09-11 22:43 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-12 0:00 ` Mark Gross
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-09-15 3:00 Scott E. Preece
2006-09-17 12:41 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-15 3:05 Scott E. Preece
2006-09-15 3:16 Scott E. Preece
2006-09-17 12:48 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-25 12:43 Scott E. Preece
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4505CCDA.8020501@gmail.com \
--to=eugeny.mints@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-pm@lists.osdl.org \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=scott.preece@motorola.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox