Hi! > >Well, two objections to that > > > >a) current powerop code does not handle 256 CPU machine, because that > >would need 256 independend bundles, and powerop has hardcoded "only > >one bundle" rule. > > The 256 is only a temporary implementation limitation. Really? 256 CPUs mean 2^256 states. How do you handle that without introducing vectors? > >b) having some devices controlled by powerop and some by specific > >subsystem is indeed ugly. I'd hope powerop would cover all the > >devices. (Or maybe cover _no_ devices). Userland should not need to > >know if touchscreen is part of SoC or if it happens to be independend > >on given machine. > > PowerOP does *not* cover devices. It covers system level parameters > such clocks, buses, voltages. I've seen "usb enabled" in one of examples.. and that sure seems like device to me. Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
