On Mon, Apr 01, 2013 at 10:29:48AM +0200, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Mon, 2013-04-01 at 11:35 +0530, Deepthi Dharwar wrote:
But then, this means we get all the arch specific code out under drivers/cpuidle which can be very messy.
Not really no. We already have that here or there in other drivers, it's not necessarily messy and the stuff like that can generally be made reasonably self contained.
The main issue is that if I (powerpc) wants a fix in my some_ppc_box_idle.c driver, especially if it needs to sync with other arch changes, having to sync/ack with Rafael might complicate things a bit (though not necessarily a lot).
I would probably keep the liberty of sending to Linus directly urgent bug/regression fixes to individual cpuidle drivers relating to our archs without waiting every now and then if for example Rafael is on vacation :-)
Merging them all over sounds like a good idea to me as well.
This isn't too different from how we handle other subsystems; as architecutre maintainer you just use your judgement on what needs an ack vs cc. Some smaller details about how the backend of the driver works on a platform is quite different from refactoring portions of the framework.
-Olof