On Fri, 2009-06-26 at 12:46 -0400, Len Brown wrote: > We'd like to ship the forced-idle thread as a self-contained driver, > if possilbe. Because that would enable us to easily back-port it > to some enterprise releases that want the feature. So if we can > implement this such that it is functional with existing scheduler > facilities, that would be get us by. If the scheduler evolves > and provides a more optimal mechanism in the future, then that is > great, as long as we don't have to wait for that to provide > the basic version of the feature. I don't think we should ever merge anything because of backports for stale kernels. If you want it in enterprise stuff all you need is something upstream, and that something should be the scheduler driven bits. After that you can argue the full backport isn't possible (should be quite easy given that enterprise kernels still think kABI is something sane) and propose this hack for them. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
