Nicholas Piggin <npig...@gmail.com> writes: > On Wed, 14 Jun 2017 21:40:52 +1000 > Michael Ellerman <m...@ellerman.id.au> wrote: > >> Nicholas Piggin <npig...@gmail.com> writes: >> >> > local_irq_enable can cause interrupts to be taken which could >> > take significant amount of processing time. The idle process >> > should set its polling flag before this, so another process that >> > wakes it during this time will not have to send an IPI. >> > >> > Expand the TIF_POLLING_NRFLAG coverage to as large as possible. >> > >> > Reviewed-by: Gautham R. Shenoy <e...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> >> > Signed-off-by: Nicholas Piggin <npig...@gmail.com> >> > --- >> > drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-powernv.c | 4 +++- >> > drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-pseries.c | 3 ++- >> > 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> I don't think the cpuidle folks are really interested in these changes, >> but we should Cc them to be polite. >> >> Can you resend patches 9, 10, 11 with a subject like: >> >> "cpuidle: powernv: Set polling ..." >> >> And Cc the cpuidle folks: >> >> $ ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl -f drivers/cpuidle >> r...@rjwysocki.net >> daniel.lezc...@linaro.org >> linux...@vger.kernel.org >> linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org > > Yeah I can do that. I'll send them as thier own series. They don't > depend on any of the patches in this series, so I should have done > that in the first place.
Great thanks. cheers
