Re: pm qos infrastructure and interface

[Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>]

On Thu, 4 Oct 2007 14:51:39 -0700 Mark Gross <mgross@linux.intel.com> wrote:

> The following patch is a generalization of the latency.c implementation
> done by Arjan last year.  It provides infrastructure for more than one
> parameter, and exposes a user mode interface for processes to register
> pm_qos expectations of processes.
> 
> 
> This interface provides a kernel and user mode interface for registering
> performance expectations by drivers, subsystems and user space
> applications on one of the parameters.
> 
> Currently we have {cpu_dma_latency, network_latency, network_throughput}
> as the initial set of pm_qos parameters.
> 
> The infrastructure exposes multiple misc device nodes one per
> implemented parameter.  The set of parameters implement is defined by
> pm_qos_power_init() and pm_qos_params.h.  This is done because having
> the available parameters being runtime configurable or changeable from a
> driver was seen as too easy to abuse.

I'm a bit surprised that this change appears to have no configurability.
If one has set CONFIG_PM=n (for example), shouldn't it all go away?
-
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/