On Wed, Jul 09, 2003 at 01:35:58PM +0200, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> Note: The Power Management isn't well implemented in 2.5 yet. The
> infrastructure is mostly there, but the driver side semantics are
> still wrong. Patrick Mochel has a new implementation that is much
> better, but he didn't merge it upstream yet. I expect this will
> happen around Kernel Summit / OLS.
I'm slightly concerned by this. There are a growing amount of drivers
in 2.5 which are being made to work with the existing power management
system. This "new" system seems to have been hanging around for about
4 months now with no visible further work, presumably so that a paper
can be presented before its release.
My concern is that there has been:
- 4 months of non-exposure of this work
- 4 months of making the current system work
- and putting it in will require a fair number of drivers to be
re-worked.
Apart from driver re-work and that the core interfaces are supposed to
be stable, what are the technical arguments against merging it, say,
today?
--
Russell King (rmk@arm.linux.org.uk) The developer of ARM Linux
http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jul 15 2003 - 22:00:31 EST