On Tuesday 20 March 2007 1:45 pm, Pavel Machek wrote: > > If I understand you correctly, you are against big debates unless a > > patch is ready, > > You understood it well. Thing is, this hasn't even gotten to the level of "debate". The "alternative" is at this point pure handwaving. The reason to insist on a patch is primarily to ensure that peoples' time doesn't get wasted. There are ways to make a concrete proposal that don't involve patches. But in this case, we haven't seen any of them. So it's fair to ask for something more concrete, such as a few patches... > But we do not want new subsystem. We want power management to > work. Take a look how Alan added pm to usb... and just do it like > him. If some code makes sense to be shared, share it. But start with > support for platform you care about and don't overdesign it. Note, Alan didn't do it by himself. The autosuspend stuff built on previous work in USB PM, and this DID get discussed -- as concrete proposals -- before he did all that good stuff. - Dave _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
