From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stefan Bader Subject: Re: Regression in 3.1 causes Xen to use wrong idle routine Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 15:57:15 +0200 Message-ID: <4EA811BB.6010005@canonical.com> References: <4EA7DFD1.9060608@canonical.com> <20111026133003.GA6654@phenom.dumpdata.com> <4EA80CF2.5040309@canonical.com> <20111026134843.GA31609@phenom.dumpdata.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from youngberry.canonical.com ([91.189.89.112]:52021 "EHLO youngberry.canonical.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932247Ab1JZN5T (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Oct 2011 09:57:19 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20111026134843.GA31609@phenom.dumpdata.com> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Cc: len.brown@intel.com, "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" On 26.10.2011 15:48, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: >>> What about using the cpuidle_disabled() functionality and adhere to that? >>> As so: >>> > .. snip.. >> >> >From reading over it, this should work. Though I would be interested to hear >> from the linux-acpi folks. Also to double check that calling pm_idle when >> cpuidle.off was specified really is what is intended. > > Oh yeah, definitly need the input from linux-acpi folks. And also to be actually > tested :-) I can volunteer to do the testing. But I am lazy enough to hold back a bit as someone may tell us this is completely the wrong way to fix it. :)