> From: John Fremlin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> [...]
>
> > Fair enough. I don't think I would be out of line to say that our
> > resources are focused on enabling full ACPI functionality for Linux,
> > including a full-featured PM policy daemon. That said, I don't think
> > there's anything precluding the use of another daemon (or whatever)
> > from using the ACPI driver's interface.
>
> ACPI != PM. I don't see why ACPI details should be exposed to PM
> interface at all.
ACPI has by far the richest set of capabilities. It is a superset of APM.
Therefore a combined APM/ACPI interface is going to look a lot like an ACPI
interface.
IMHO an abstracted interface at this point is overengineering. Maybe later
it will make sense, though.
Regards -- Andy
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
