Hi!
> >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.
Really? 256 CPUs mean 2^256 states. How do you handle that without
introducing vectors?
> >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.
I've seen "usb enabled" in one of examples.. and that sure seems like
device to me.
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
