* Peter Zijlstra [2009-08-28 09:01:12]:
> On Fri, 2009-08-28 at 08:48 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > > void cpuidle_install_idle_handler(void)
> > > {
> > > .
> > > .
> > > cpuidle_pm_idle = cpuidle_idle_call;
> > > }
> >
> > All I'm seeing here is a frig
On Fri, 2009-08-28 at 08:48 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > void cpuidle_install_idle_handler(void)
> > {
> > .
> > .
> > cpuidle_pm_idle = cpuidle_idle_call;
> > }
>
> All I'm seeing here is a frigging mess.
>
> How on earths can something called: cpuidle_in
* Peter Zijlstra [2009-08-28 08:48:05]:
> On Fri, 2009-08-28 at 11:44 +0530, Arun R Bharadwaj wrote:
> > * Peter Zijlstra [2009-08-27 14:53:27]:
> >
> > Hi Peter, Ben,
> >
> > I've put the whole thing in a sort of a block diagram. Hope it
> > explains things more clearly.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
On Fri, 2009-08-28 at 11:44 +0530, Arun R Bharadwaj wrote:
> * Peter Zijlstra [2009-08-27 14:53:27]:
>
> Hi Peter, Ben,
>
> I've put the whole thing in a sort of a block diagram. Hope it
> explains things more clearly.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
On Fri, 2009-08-28 at 10:19 +0530, Arun R Bharadwaj wrote:
>
>
> This only does the job of picking the right idle loop for current
> latency and power requirement. This is already done in ladder/menu
> governors under the routines menu_select()/ladder_select().
> I'm not sure whats the purpose of
* Peter Zijlstra [2009-08-27 14:53:27]:
> On Thu, 2009-08-27 at 17:23 +0530, Arun R Bharadwaj wrote:
> > * Arun R Bharadwaj [2009-08-27 17:19:08]:
> >
> > Cpuidle infrastructure assumes pm_idle as the default idle routine.
> > But, ppc_md.power_save is the default idle callback in case of pSeri
* Peter Zijlstra [2009-08-27 14:53:27]:
Hi Peter, Ben,
I've put the whole thing in a sort of a block diagram. Hope it
explains things more clearly.
|CPUIDLE | (Select idle states like
* Peter Zijlstra [2009-08-27 14:53:27]:
> On Thu, 2009-08-27 at 17:23 +0530, Arun R Bharadwaj wrote:
> > * Arun R Bharadwaj [2009-08-27 17:19:08]:
> >
> > Cpuidle infrastructure assumes pm_idle as the default idle routine.
> > But, ppc_md.power_save is the default idle callback in case of pSeri
On Thu, 2009-08-27 at 14:53 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> I'm not quite seeing how this makes anything any better. Not we have 3
> function pointers, where 1 should suffice.
There's also the question of us having different "idle" vs.
"power_save", the former being the entire idle loop, the later
On Thu, 2009-08-27 at 17:23 +0530, Arun R Bharadwaj wrote:
> * Arun R Bharadwaj [2009-08-27 17:19:08]:
>
> Cpuidle infrastructure assumes pm_idle as the default idle routine.
> But, ppc_md.power_save is the default idle callback in case of pSeries.
>
> So, create a more generic, architecture ind
* Arun R Bharadwaj [2009-08-27 17:19:08]:
Cpuidle infrastructure assumes pm_idle as the default idle routine.
But, ppc_md.power_save is the default idle callback in case of pSeries.
So, create a more generic, architecture independent cpuidle_pm_idle
function pointer in driver/cpuidle/cpuidle.c a
11 matches
Mail list logo
