Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752377AbbGNM3c (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Jul 2015 08:29:32 -0400 Received: from pandora.arm.linux.org.uk ([78.32.30.218]:41451 "EHLO pandora.arm.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751554AbbGNM3b (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Jul 2015 08:29:31 -0400 Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2015 13:29:04 +0100 From: Russell King - ARM Linux To: Lorenzo Pieralisi Cc: Jisheng Zhang , Will Deacon , Mark Rutland , "daniel.lezcano@linaro.org" , Catalin Marinas , "galak@codeaurora.org" , "agross@codeaurora.org" , "davidb@codeaurora.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] arm: kernel: implement cpuidle_ops with psci backend Message-ID: <20150714122904.GV7557@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1436430685-2202-1-git-send-email-jszhang@marvell.com> <1436430685-2202-4-git-send-email-jszhang@marvell.com> <20150714103421.GU7557@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20150714110302.GA334@red-moon> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150714110302.GA334@red-moon> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2177 Lines: 49 On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 12:03:02PM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 11:34:21AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > +static struct cpuidle_ops psci_cpuidle_ops __initdata = { > > > + .suspend = cpu_psci_cpu_suspend, > > > + .init = cpu_psci_cpu_init_idle, > > > +}; > > > +CPUIDLE_METHOD_OF_DECLARE(psci_cpuidle, "psci", &psci_cpuidle_ops); > > I take this as an ACK to M.Rutland's PSCI code move to drivers/firmware, > right ? No, that's not something I've particularly looked at. PSCI doesn't really interest me because I have no systems which (afaik) support it. > > We don't do this for other stuff - we don't have IRQ_CHIP_OF_DECLARE > > stuff in arch/arm but have the IRQ chip drivers in drivers/irqchip. > > We keep it all togehter in drivers/irqchip, even when the IRQ chip > > driver is only useful on ARM. > > CPUidle operations are ARM only, they are not used on ARM64, so > they belong in arch/arm (that's the same thing as SMP ops, on ARM64 > SMP ops and CPUidle ops are unified through CPU operations). I don't agree with that. CPU idle isn't an "ARM thing" at all, it's generic kernel infrastructure. OF is generic kernel infrastructure too. Yet, we're stuffing _all_ the PSCI CPU idle code into drivers/firmware/psci.c, but then stuffing the PSCI OF data structures into arch/arm. This is utterly _insane_. There is nothing ARM specific about these CPU idle ops. They don't belong on arch/arm. NAK on this series (and the move of the PSCI code to drivers/firmware) until people start seeing sense with stuff like this. Having stuff split between arch/arm/ and drivers/ like this is totally crap. It makes code unnecessary complex for no reason what so ever. Find a solution which doesn't involve leaving _just_ data structures to connect stuff to OF in arch/arm. -- FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 10.5Mbps down 400kbps up according to speedtest.net. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/