On Thursday, March 8, 2018 12:39:12 AM CET Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 10:02:15AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > Index: linux-pm/kernel/sched/idle.c > > =================================================================== > > --- linux-pm.orig/kernel/sched/idle.c > > +++ linux-pm/kernel/sched/idle.c > > @@ -220,13 +220,17 @@ static void do_idle(void) > > */ > > > > __current_set_polling(); > > - tick_nohz_idle_enter(); > > + tick_nohz_idle_prepare(); > > Since we leave tick_nohz_idle_exit() unchanged, can we keep > tick_nohz_idle_prepare() > under the name tick_nohz_idle_enter() so that we stay symetric? And then make > xen call > the two functions: > > tick_nohz_idle_enter(); > tick_nohz_idle_go_idle();
No problem with that. > Also can we rename tick_nohz_idle_go_idle() to tick_nohz_idle_stop_tick() ? > This will be more self-explanatory. But it doesn't always stop the tick which is why I chose the other name.
