On 03/20, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > The current state of the different cpuidle drivers is the different PM > operations are passed via the platform_data using the platform driver > paradigm. > > This approach allowed to split the low level PM code from the arch specific > and the generic cpuidle code. > > Unfortunately there are complaints about this approach as, in the context of > the > single kernel image, we have multiple drivers loaded in memory for nothing and > the platform driver is not adequate for cpuidle. > > This patch provides a common interface via cpuidle ops for all new cpuidle > driver and a definition for the device tree. > > It will allow with the next patches to a have a common definition with ARM64 > and share the same cpuidle driver. > > The code is optimized to use the __init section intensively in order to reduce > the memory footprint after the driver is initialized and unify the function > names with ARM64. > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <[email protected]> > Acked-by: Kevin Hilman <[email protected]> > Acked-by: Rob Herring <[email protected]>
Thanks for moving to OF tables. We can merge smp ops and cpuidle ops later on. Acked-by: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]> -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
