Hi Rafael, On 14 September 2016 at 00:10, Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tuesday, September 13, 2016 10:02:49 PM Alex Shi wrote: >> Hi Daniel & Rafael, >> >> Any comments on this patch? > > I actually am not sure about the whole series. > > I know your motivation, but honestly the changes here may not be the best way > to achieve what you need. > > You may think that the changes are trivial, but in fact they are not. There > are side effects and I'm not sure about the resulting user space interface > at all.
This patchset has got 2 parts: - one part is about taking into account per-device resume latency constraint when selecting the idle state of a CPU. This value can already be set by kernel (even if it's probably not done yet) but this constraint is never taken into account - the other part is about exposing the resume latency to userspace. This part might raise more discussion but I see one example that could take advantage of this. When you have several clusters of CPUs and you want to dedicate some CPUs to latency sensitive activity and prevent deep sleep state on these CPUs but you want to let the other CPUs using all C-state Regards, Vincent > > Thanks, > Rafael > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm" in > the body of a message to [email protected] > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
