Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 3 Feb 2003 02:56:44 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 3 Feb 2003 02:56:44 -0500 Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk ([195.92.249.252]:28938 "EHLO www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 3 Feb 2003 02:56:43 -0500 Message-ID: <3E3E22DC.60806@pobox.com> Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2003 03:05:48 -0500 From: Jeff Garzik Organization: none User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20021003 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lkml Subject: Re: RFC: a code slush for 2.5? References: <3E3E21D3.1090402@pobox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 611 Lines: 14 Jeff Garzik wrote: > to be made, before a lot of that can be used, too. Power Management is > another area. That sorta fell by the wayside, IMO, but _is_ doable > given the current infrastructure that 2.5 now has. To clarify a bit, _CPU_ power management is looking quite nice, I was referring mainly to PCI bus power management, and other host/bus PM issues - 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/