+1 from me if I can, :) We may need to go through the code review to see if there is anything can be merged after deep c-state's integration. It looks like we will have several TSC read functions when entering and existing idle. I could be wrong I didn't review the code.
Thanks, -Aubrey Bill.Holler wrote: > +1. > > Low level details such as ordering of hardware re-initialization > will need to evolve as future hardware implementations are designed. > > Bill > > > On 02/13/09 11:30, Raj, Ashok wrote: >> Guess I can't +1 our own case :-) >> >> The doc is updated to incorporate the lastest feedback > AFAICT based on my last conversation with Gerry. >> >> Regarding this being under tesla or PM, the first user of > this interface would be FIPE, that's why we wanted to be under > tesla, but the notification itself if sort of generic so it > really doesn't matter from our perspective as long as there is > some place to exist. >> >> We agree this will be evolving based on implementation and >> architecture as it evolves. >> >> Thanks Randy for shepherding this though. I have been under > the hood to debug some weird things and just managed to get > out of the lab. >> >> Thanks a ton >> Cheers, >> ashok >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: tesla-dev-bounces at opensolaris.org > [mailto:tesla-dev-bounces at opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Eric >>> Saxe >>> Sent: Friday, February 13, 2009 11:09 AM >>> To: Randy Fishel >>> Cc: tesla-dev at opensolaris.org >>> Subject: Re: [tesla-dev] CPU idle notification interface (FIPE) >>> >>> Randy Fishel wrote: >>> >>>> Hi All- >>>> >>>> There is some (legitimate) pressure to get this integrated into >>>> the core ASAP, and as such needs to have an ARC review. So to get >>>> this moving, I need three things from the poject alias (some >>>> specific to individuals): >>>> >>>> First (a good thing for Ashok), is the spec on the project pages >>>> current? >>>> > http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/tesla/Work/MemPM/onepager_v3.txt >>>> If not, point me and this list to the current spec? >>>> >>>> >>> This looks current to me. Perhaps Gerry can confirm he had >>> incorporated all the comments from before into this...but it looks >>> that way to me. >>> >>>> Second, I need sufficient +1's from the leaders that this >>>> project is desired. >>>> >>>> >>> +1 from me. One question I have is whether this really should be >>> under Tesla (which i'm ok with), or whether it should be under the >>> PM community now that we have one. If this belongs as its own >>> project, then the PM community CCs need to +1 this. My +1 stands >>> either way. >>> >>> >>>> Third, I need sufficient +1's from the leaders that the above >>>> spec is what you are agreeing to. >>>> >>>> >>> +1, with the observation that the nitty gritty details might change >>> with the implementation. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> -Eric >>> _______________________________________________ >>> tesla-dev mailing list >>> tesla-dev at opensolaris.org >>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/tesla-dev >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> tesla-dev mailing list >> tesla-dev at opensolaris.org >> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/tesla-dev >> > > _______________________________________________ > tesla-dev mailing list > tesla-dev at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/tesla-dev
