Re: community PM requirements/issues and PowerOP [Was: Re: So, what's the status on the recent patches here?]

Pavel Machek
2006-09-11T19:55:46Z

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.

> - The PowerOP interface was discussed in detail on this list and we
> haven't heard any negative comments.

Eh? Was I on different list?

> - 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.
Pavel

--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html