From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Yu Chen Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC v2] ACPI: acpi_pad: Do not launch acpi_pad threads on idle cpus Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 09:56:57 +0800 Message-ID: <20181212015656.GA25427@chenyu-desktop> References: <1525521202-32519-1-git-send-email-yu.c.chen@intel.com> <20181210063153.GO5327@linux-l9pv.suse> <20181211031220.GA23975@chenyu-desktop> <20181211083754.GE28555@linux-l9pv.suse> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20181211083754.GE28555@linux-l9pv.suse> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: joeyli Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Len Brown , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Lenny Szubowicz , Jacob Pan , Rui Zhang , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org Hi, On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 04:37:54PM +0800, joeyli wrote: > Hi Yu Chen, > > Thanks for your response! > > On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 11:12:21AM +0800, Yu Chen wrote: > > Hi Joey, > > On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 02:31:53PM +0800, joeyli wrote: > > > Hi Chen Yu and ACPI experts, > > > > > > On Sat, May 05, 2018 at 07:53:22PM +0800, Chen Yu wrote: > > > > According to current implementation of acpi_pad driver, > > > > it does not make sense to spawn any power saving threads > > > > on the cpus which are already idle - it might bring > > > > unnecessary overhead on these idle cpus and causes power > > > > waste. So verify the condition that if the number of 'busy' > > > > cpus exceeds the amount of the 'forced idle' cpus is met. > > > > This is applicable due to round-robin attribute of the > > > > power saving threads, otherwise ignore the setting/ACPI > > > > notification. > > > > > > > > Suggested-by: Lenny Szubowicz > > > > Suggested-by: Len Brown > > > > Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" > > > > Cc: Lenny Szubowicz > > > > Cc: Len Brown > > > > Cc: Jacob Pan > > > > Cc: Rui Zhang > > > > Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org > > > > Signed-off-by: Chen Yu > > > > > > Do you have any news for this patch? Why it did not merged by kernel > > > maineline? > > > > > We are evaluating if this could be integrated into idle injection framework. > > May I know if there's any requirement/background from SUSE on this? > > > > I am also looking at your patch and idle injection framework. Currently I do not > have good suggestion for your patches yet. But I will try to ready my knowledge when > you send out new version. > Thanks. I mean, does SUSE get report from customers who encountered this issue? BTW, may I know the status of the encryption hibernation please?(Usin the TPM?) Best, Yu(Ryan) > Thanks a lot! > Joey Lee