From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sudeep Holla Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] cpuidle optimizations (on top of linux-next) Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 13:45:42 +0000 Message-ID: <569CEC86.5080002@arm.com> References: <1621492.NI2xz9vt7M@vostro.rjw.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:34705 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754902AbcARNpp (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jan 2016 08:45:45 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1621492.NI2xz9vt7M@vostro.rjw.lan> Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Peter Zijlstra Cc: Sudeep Holla , Linux PM list , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Ingo Molnar , Daniel Lezcano On 15/01/16 23:53, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > Hi, > > When I was looking at the cpuidle code after the Sudeeps's problem report, > it occured to me that we had some pointless overhead there, so two > changes to reduce it follow. > > [1/2] Make the fallback to to default_idle_call() in call_cpuidle() > unnecessary and drop it. > [2/2] Make menu_select() avoid checking states that don't need to > (or even shouldn't) be checked when making the selection. > Tested-by: Sudeep Holla -- Regards, Sudeep