On Wed, 2016-03-02 at 01:21 +0000, Kalowsky, Daniel wrote:
-----Original Message-----When I had asked you to do a rev.next of the RFC, this isn't what I had in mind. From reading the RFC, I should be able to formulate:
From: Thomas, Ramesh [mailto:ramesh.thomas(a)intel.com]
Sent: Monday, February 29, 2016 1:59 AM
Subject: [devel] RFC [0/3] - SoC, CPU LPS, Tickless idle and Device power
Migrating this RFC from the old server for reference. This is updated
with the feedbacks that were incorporated. This consists of the
[0/3] - This overview
[1/3] - SoC, CPU and Tickless Idle power management (merged)
[2/3] - Device power management (under review)
[3/3] - Areas to be implemented next including open feedbacks
- A clear definition of any terminology being introduced to the kernel (i.e. Deep Sleep).
- A clear idea of what you are trying to accomplish as the overall task.
- An idea of how this over-arching task can be broken down to smaller sub-tasks of functionality.
- A clear description of the flow that the system should follow when implementing Task A to sub-taskX. Verbal is okay, but honestly, pictures go much further. Even ASCII art pictures do plenty to help explain things more than words.
- A clear idea of how the concept works for ARC, ARM, and x86; any support discrepancies, sections that are arch agnostic, and sections that are arch dependent.
All of this work should become part of the cover letter, but also should be the basis for the work added to the documentation. Essentially you are teaching the rest of us about how this will work as if we've not had any experience with it.
While reading these 3 posts, I avoided looking at the code. There is a lot of confusing language within that melds multiple different ideas into something that does not paint a coherent image of the power management scheme. It reads like it was forced and rushed through. I'm more than happy to help walk-through and correct where I see things missing off-list.
Sure. I will be glad to work with you on making it better. Thanks.