On Wed, 25 Jul 2007, Len Brown wrote:.. and why do you think I want system sleep support? That's the bug. I want SMP, dammit. This machine has multi-core. And I want ACPI. I just don't want the system sleep thing. I didn't have it before, I don't need it, I don't want it. That wasn't true before, and it makes no sense what-so-ever as an assumption. The system sleep states are mostly usable on laptops. Not always even then. They are seldom used on desktops or servers, but both of those are often SMP machines, and certainly want ACPI. So your "99%" makes no sense. But why the *hell* is this dependent on ACPI? Why not just do ACPI_SLEEP, and have *that* do "select HOTPLUG_CPU/SUSPEND_CPU". That makes no sense. You're tying together things that have *nothing* to do with each other. As mentioned (and as is *obvious*), pretty much everybody who has a multi-core CPU on x86 wants ACPI and SMP. But the set of people who want to sw-suspend such a machine is *much* smaller. There is no 99%. Linus -
| Natalie Protasevich | [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
| david | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Bart Van Assche | Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel |
| Greg KH | [GIT PATCH] driver core patches against 2.6.24 |
git: | |
| Jarek Poplawski | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
| Patrick McHardy | [NET_SCHED 00/04]: External SFQ classifiers/flow classifier |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
