Re: [PATCH] apm: orphan the driver

[Jiri Kosina]

On Mon, 28 Mar 2011, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> > Phasing out APM idle at least would be reasonable.  resumably even if the old
> > laptops still work they are likely on AC because their batteries have
> > long died. So using a bit more power in idle shouldn't be a big
> > issue.
> 
> Agreed. Especially since I'm not at all convinced that APM CPU idling
> ever really worked in the first place.
> 
> And as you say, it's not a catastrophic failure even if we were to
> remove it, and even if it were to have mattered on those old laptops
> years ago. I think we can happily say "not worth worrying about" when
> it comes to APM_CPU_IDLE.
> 
> And shutdown, suspend and screensaver should all be much easier to
> continue to support - they shouldn't have any serious infrastructure
> issues.

APM_CPU_IDLE removal doesn't really sound as a disaster, yes. I doubt 
anyone would even notice.

So deprecating it altogether with planned Len's code reshuffling seems 
like reasonable aproach to me.

_SUSPEND, poweroff and probably _STANDBY are the parts I would care much 
more about.

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/