Cesar Eduardo Barros wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 30, 2000 at 11:58:47AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > In a lot of ways apmd discussions are moot since the world is moving to
> > ACPI and acpid...
> Not really, since acpid will probably do whatever apmd is doing now...
Doubtful.
Right now acpid and apmd are heavily tied into the specifics of their
protocols. There are some generic power management concepts which could
be moved into a higher level daemon (or callback in your scenario). But
where apmd won't be getting a lot of new functionality, acpid (and the
ACPI standard itself) are still under heavy development.
Some of the acpid stuff will probably wind up in the kernel, I'm
betting, since it has tables which specify APIC and CPU details, and
other such things.
So of course feel free to work on apmd but I think working on acpid (and
associated ACPI code) would be far more productive. Since APM is "the
past" [1] and ACPI is "the future", the set of machines for which apmd
changes are useful will grow increasingly smaller.
Jeff
[1] and "the present"
-- Jeff Garzik | Nothing cures insomnia like the Building 1024 | realization that it's time to get up. MandrakeSoft, Inc. | -- random fortune- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 30 2000 - 21:00:18 EST