From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965114AbVHJN6z (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Aug 2005 09:58:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965115AbVHJN6z (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Aug 2005 09:58:55 -0400 Received: from wproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.184.197]:14757 "EHLO wproxy.gmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965114AbVHJN6y convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Aug 2005 09:58:54 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=j1O4sS+i3rMA9BQntUZJ7DbrhP3wF43c4/2fE8dJcDEw+NLu+AmcwLtcvxToAOaw18bXCrRAEziUHd7tFgHt7ehd04qe0vhq6SlKGQdWVRxL+hljlB6lPpKIvW5kvF2LKoOZawb0gyb4ErhUT+vNwYWF3Dxg1/+e5xP02dAsr0I= Message-ID: <9268368b05081006585ca7a415@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 09:58:49 -0400 From: Daniel Petrini To: Todd Poynor Subject: Re: [linux-pm] PowerOP 1/3: PowerOP core Cc: Geoff Levand , cpufreq@lists.linux.org.uk, linux-pm@lists.osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <42F94B68.6060107@mvista.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Disposition: inline References: <20050809025157.GB25064@slurryseal.ddns.mvista.com> <42F8D4C5.2090800@am.sony.com> <42F94B68.6060107@mvista.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > If these general ideas of arbitrary platform power parameters and > operating points are deemed worthy of continued consideration, I'll > propose what I view is the next step: interfaces to create and activate > operating points from userspace. > > At that point it should be possible to write power policy management > applications for systems that can benefit from this generalized notion > of operating points: create the operating points that match the system > usage models (in the case of many embedded systems, the system is some > mode with different power/performance characteristics such as audio > playback vs. mobile phone call in progress) and power needs (e.g., low > battery strength vs. high strength) and activate operating points based > on events received (new app running, low battery warning, etc.). > > Any opinions on all that? Thanks, > > -- > Todd Hi, I'd like to have an idea of how the powerop would evolve to address: a) exporting all operating points to sysfs - that would be useful for a policy manager in user space, or the user policy will already be aware of the ops? b) Constraints: if I would like to change to a op and such a transition is not allowed in hardware, what part of the software will test it? The set/get powerop functions, the higher layers or even some lower layer (don't know if expected) ? thanks, Daniel -- 10LE - Linux INdT - Manaus - Brazil