[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100528105333.40a1efbe@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 10:53:33 +0100
From: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: tytso@....edu
Cc: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Florian Mickler <florian@...kler.org>, felipe.balbi@...ia.com,
Linux OMAP Mailing List <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8)
Ted
As a PS to the previous email the situation has I think more choices than
you portray.
Given the need for various constraints imposed by drivers for things like
RT it's entirely possible that a solution ends up being something like
Kernel proper:
Turn suspend block kernel API into an expression of constraints (or
whatever else seems to work)
Throw the user space in the bin
Google:
Use the constraints in a sledgehammer manner (hey it solves your problem
in that form so why not)
Patch in a private user space API
That makes things much much easier as we don't risk getting a horribly
broken API into the kernel that is hard to remove, while hopefully
meaning its rather easier for google to merge drivers and other code as
well as to maintain a smaller patch set.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists