On Thursday 13 May 2010, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 12:36:34PM -0700, Daniel Walker wrote: > > On Thu, 2010-05-13 at 20:11 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > > See feature-removal-schedule.txt. So far we have no indication that it's > > > going to be replaced, because nobody has actually suggested a working > > > way to do this better. If we had a concrete implementation proposal for > > > that then we'd be in a pretty different position right now. > > > > Ok, feature-removal-schedule.txt applies to everything tho. What your > > saying is that if this interface only last a short time it might take 6 > > months, if it last for a long time it would take longer. There's no easy > > way to know that Google is the only user after some amount of time > > passes. > > If the interface is there for a long time, it's because we haven't come > up with anything better. And if we haven't come up with anything better, > the interface deserves to be there. Moreover, the interface is already in use out-of-tree and that usage is actually _growing_, so we have a growing number of out-of-tree drivers that aren't megrgeable for this very reason. I don't see any _realistic_ way of solving this problem other than merging the opportunistic suspend. If anyone sees one, and I mean _realistic_ and _practically_ _feasible_, please tell me. Rafael _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
