lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Apr]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 16/18] 2.6.40: x86 idle APM: remove deprecated apm_cpu_idle()
> This patch series was posted in reply to a table of contents
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/4/2/8
>
> "By the end of this series, pm_idle is removed as a public
> x86 idle-loop registration mechanism. A few other things are
> cleaned up in the process."

Ok so lets rewind a bit - why do we want to remove pm_idle rather than
just fix up the way registration occurs. It's just a symbol, one trivial
interface that is exported and perhaps wants the export method tidying up.

> Trinabh also replied to you, pointing one of the previous
> LKML discussions about the mis-use of pm_idle.

And there are misuses of just about every kernel symbol - kmalloc for
example causes some people a lot of trouble !

> We'll create a new APM cpuidle driver in Linux (Trinabh prototyped one),
> and at the same time, schedule it for removal in a year. Personally,
> I think it is make-work, and in real-life it is more likely to do
> more harm than removing apm_idle, but I don't want to stand in the
> way of process.

So you could just leave it alone - that's less work, less disruption and
doesn't do any harm at all.

As I read this the plan at the moment otherwise is

- churn up all the code
- remove PM idle hook
- rewrite the APM code
- replace the APM code

whereas you could just leave the symbol exported or even just a hook to
make people to do it right using:

int register_pm_idle(function);

Simples yes ?

and then wait a year

For that matter instead of writing a new driver you could just stuff APM
into same hooks we have for virtualisation !

This whole patch series appears to be a giant piece of pointless makework.

Alan


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-04-02 23:03    [W:0.103 / U:0.468 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site