Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 22:25:36 -0400 (EDT)
From: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
Cc: Trinabh Gupta <trinabh@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, venki@google.com,
        ak@linux.intel.com, suresh.b.siddha@intel.com, sfr@canb.auug.org.au,
        peterz@infradead.org, benh@kernel.crashing.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xen-devel@lists.xensource.com,
        arjan@linux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [RFC PATCH V4 2/5] cpuidle: list based cpuidle
 driver registration and selection
In-reply-to: <20110325153524.GN27651@dumpdata.com>
Message-id: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1103302222180.1920@x980>
References: <20110322123208.28725.30945.stgit@tringupt.in.ibm.com>
 <20110322123233.28725.92874.stgit@tringupt.in.ibm.com>
 <alpine.LFD.2.02.1103222254420.10549@x980>
 <4D89BBDD.5090505@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <alpine.LFD.2.02.1103231633030.12911@x980>
 <4D8B5197.2060306@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <alpine.LFD.2.02.1103250245570.32565@x980>
 <20110325153524.GN27651@dumpdata.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (LFD 1266 2009-07-14)
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1803
Lines: 48


thanks,
Len Brown, Intel Open Source Technology Center

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 03:05:36AM -0400, Len Brown wrote:
> > > I think there are other problems too, related to saving and restoring
> > > of pm_idle pointer. For example, cpuidle itself saves current value
> > > of pm_idle, flips it and then restores the saved value. There is
> > > no guarantee that the saved function still exists. APM does exact
> > > same thing (though it may not be used these days).
> > > 
> > > The problem also is that a number of architectures have copied the
> > > same design based on pm_idle; so its spreading.
> > 
> > pm_idle is a primitive design yes, but I think the issue
> > with pm_idle is a theoretical one, at least on x86;
> > as there isn't any other code scribbling on pm_idle
> > in practice.  So this is clean-up, rather than bug-fix work...
> > 
> > > > It isn't immediately clear to me that all of these options
> > > > need to be preserved.
> > > 
> > > So what do you suggest can be removed?
> > 
> > I sent a series of small patches yesterday to get the ball rolling...
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/3/24/54
> > 
> > I think the xen thing can go away.
> 
> The xen thing being the setting of cpuidle to halt or the proposed
> patch?

I don't think Xen needs a cpuidle driver.
Xen just needs to tell the kernel to call HALT,
and I think we'll keep that around for the non-cpuidle case,
and for the idle periods before cpuidle initializes.

cheers,
Len Brown, Intel Open Source Technology Center

--
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/