lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jun]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [linux-pm] suspend blockers & Android integration
On Sun, 6 Jun 2010, James Bottomley wrote:
>
> 3. We've lost sight of one of the original goals, which was to
> bring the android tree close enough to the kernel so that the
> android downstream driver and board producers don't have to
> choose between the android kernel and vanilla kernel.

There are two ways to do that w/o creating a dependcy on anything.

1) merge the drivers w/o the suspend_blockers. It's not rocket science
to have a patch which brings them back for android.

2) merge the drivers with empty stub implementations for annotation.
android just has to patch in the real one.

While I'd prefer #1, I' not in the way of #2.

Both ways can get the drivers into the kernel and it could/should have
been done right from the beginning, but now we face a situation where
drivers are held hostage.

Then we can sit down more relaxed and fix the stuff in a way which
makes both sides happy. If we manage to replace them, we can deprecate
the stub implementation and remove it after a grace period. If we
rename them it's not an issue either. We can rename them right away to
a qos interface, but that does not really make a difference.

What we really want to avoid is implementing an user space contract in
a frenzy which binds us forever.

It's not the suspend_blockers which are the causing the nightmare,
it's solely the drivers itself especially when there are different
implementations in both trees. And frankly, the drivers in android are
not in a shape which makes them flood in within 2 weeks. That's
serious work to get them brushed up and polished. So that gives us
quite a period of time to solve the suspend problem.

Thanks,

tglx


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-06-06 17:49    [W:0.112 / U:0.196 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site