From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932156AbWIXVd1 (ORCPT ); Sun, 24 Sep 2006 17:33:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932161AbWIXVd1 (ORCPT ); Sun, 24 Sep 2006 17:33:27 -0400 Received: from smtp101.biz.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([68.142.200.236]:11937 "HELO smtp101.biz.mail.mud.yahoo.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S932162AbWIXVd0 (ORCPT ); Sun, 24 Sep 2006 17:33:26 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20060923111805.GF20778@elf.ucw.cz> References: <200609222034.k8MKYoDK008487@olwen.urbana.css.mot.com> <20060923111805.GF20778@elf.ucw.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v624) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <6c3c9c9fa4961ca081c2742684201418@nomadgs.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-pm@lists.osdl.org, "Scott E. Preece" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Matthew Locke Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH] PowerOP, PowerOP Core, 1/2 Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 14:33:23 -0700 To: Pavel Machek X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.624) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sep 23, 2006, at 4:18 AM, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > >> Note that I don't think PowerOp would cover all devices. In fact, I >> think most devices would remain autonomous or controlled as part of >> specific subsystems. The only things that PowerOp would bundle >> together >> would be things that aren't independent (and may not even be visible >> as >> "devices" in the usual Linux sense), but that have to be managed >> together in changing frequency/voltage. At least, that's the way I >> imagined it would work. > > Well, two objections to that > > a) current powerop code does not handle 256 CPU machine, because that > would need 256 independend bundles, and powerop has hardcoded "only > one bundle" rule. The 256 is only a temporary implementation limitation. > > b) having some devices controlled by powerop and some by specific > subsystem is indeed ugly. I'd hope powerop would cover all the > devices. (Or maybe cover _no_ devices). Userland should not need to > know if touchscreen is part of SoC or if it happens to be independend > on given machine. PowerOP does *not* cover devices. It covers system level parameters such clocks, buses, voltages. > > Pavel > -- > (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek > (cesky, pictures) > http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html > _______________________________________________ > linux-pm mailing list > linux-pm@lists.osdl.org > https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm >