On Mon 2007-05-21 14:45:53, Matthew Garrett wrote:
quoted text
> On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 03:40:46PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > On Mon 2007-05-21 14:36:08, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 03:29:48PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > Significantly more correct? It forces you to do all the thermal
> > > > management in userspace!
> > > 
> > > Why's that a problem? 
> > 
> > Duplicating all the kernel logic in userspace, badly?
> 
> So don't do it badly. The advantage of doing so is that you can make it 
> work properly, which you can't by putting it in the kernel.

You want stuff like critical shutdowns to work even if userspace is
dead.

I do not think you can control passive cooling adequately from
userspace, and you can certainly not prevent kernel from slowing
machine down too soon.

Plus, this is actually nasty user-visible change, and a regression
from 2.6.21. I am not sure why we are even debating this; user-kernel
interface changed without warning. Patch should be simply reverted.

								Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/