From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
To: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
Cc: lenb@kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] cpuidle: define the enter function in the driver structure
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2012 22:38:44 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201207052238.44330.rjw@sisk.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1341494608-16591-2-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
On Thursday, July 05, 2012, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> We have the state index passed as parameter to the 'enter' function.
> Most of the drivers assign their 'enter' functions several times in
> the cpuidle_state structure, as we have the index, we can delegate
> to the driver to handle their own callback array.
>
> That will have the benefit of removing multiple lines of code in the
> different drivers.
Hmm. I suppose the cpuidle subsystem was designed the way it was for a reason.
Among other things, this was to avoid recurrence in callbacks - please see
acpi_idle_enter_bm() for example.
Now, if .enter() is moved to the driver structure, it will have to be an
all-purpose complicated routine calling itself recursively at least in
some cases. I'm not quite convinced that would be an improvement.
On the other hand, I don't see anything wrong with setting several callback
pointers to the same routine.
Thanks,
Rafael
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-05 20:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-05 13:23 [PATCH 1/4] acpi: intel_idle : break dependency between modules Daniel Lezcano
2012-07-05 13:23 ` [PATCH 2/4] cpuidle: define the enter function in the driver structure Daniel Lezcano
2012-07-05 20:38 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2012-07-06 10:58 ` Daniel Lezcano
2012-07-06 21:23 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-07-10 8:29 ` Rajendra Nayak
2012-07-10 11:39 ` Daniel Lezcano
2012-07-10 12:38 ` Rajendra Nayak
2012-07-05 13:23 ` [PATCH 3/4] cpuidle: move enter_dead to " Daniel Lezcano
2012-07-05 20:40 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-07-06 11:05 ` Daniel Lezcano
2012-07-06 21:27 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-07-05 13:23 ` [PATCH 4/4] cpuidle : move tlb flag to the cpuidle header Daniel Lezcano
2012-07-05 20:43 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-07-06 11:07 ` Daniel Lezcano
2012-07-06 21:29 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-07-05 20:26 ` [PATCH 1/4] acpi: intel_idle : break dependency between modules Rafael J. Wysocki
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201207052238.44330.rjw@sisk.pl \
--to=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).