Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752702AbZK3MaI (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Nov 2009 07:30:08 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751409AbZK3MaH (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Nov 2009 07:30:07 -0500 Received: from atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz ([195.113.26.193]:34847 "EHLO atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751208AbZK3MaF (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Nov 2009 07:30:05 -0500 Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 13:30:04 +0100 From: Pavel Machek To: Brian Swetland Cc: Corentin Chary , Arve Hj??nnev??g , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Chih-Wei Huang , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] staging/android fixes Message-ID: <20091130123004.GG13328@elf.ucw.cz> References: <1259397915-762-1-git-send-email-corentincj@iksaif.net> <20091129084351.GD1530@ucw.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Warning: Reading this can be dangerous to your mental health. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1526 Lines: 36 > >> Arve's done a few revisions of the wakelock code with the linux-pm > >> list, and I know he's planning on trying to work through the remaining > >> issues (as I recall there was some discussion on read/write vs ioctl > >> interfaces to userspace) in the near future. > >> > >> This really is the one piece that has the most impact on everything > >> else -- maintaining versions of the various platform hardware drivers > >> with and without wakelock support is messy. > > > > It is really not that bad. Yes, it touches most drivers, but it is few > > lines per driver and easy to remove. > > > > Waiting for wakelocks (1year plus, AFAICT) before merging hw drivers > > seems like very slow way forward. > > I'm not suggesting we hold off on everything until they're in, just > saying it'll simplify things once they are. That's certainly true :-). > I'd like to get to a point where we can ship out of the upstream > kernel and that's going to need power management to work. If we can > sort out wakelocks (as it seemed like we were getting close to), > that's one less difference to maintain. Yes, that would be nice. 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 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/