On Tue, Sep 12, 2006 at 12:43:13AM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > On Mon 2006-09-11 14:53:03, Mark Gross wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 10:20:25AM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > Lets get kernel<->user interface right, first. You'll need to create > > > Documentation/ entries for your interfaces, eventually, so lets do > > > that, first, and then talk about code. Oh and it would be nice to cc > > > lkml on that document, too. New kernel<->user interface is not > > > decision taken lightly. > > > > Is this just trying delay power op getting into the kernel? We are > > building up / evolving a PM stack from bottom up and you want to the > > high level interface to be well defined and agreed upon first? > > As long as you do not introduce _any_ user<->kernel interfaces within > patch series, going without Documentation is okay. But IIRC that was > not the case. > I don't think providing Documentation on whatever interface will be a problem. --mgross
