From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kevin Hilman Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH] CPUidle: compile fix for non-x86 Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 10:51:04 -0800 Message-ID: <87tzkt96cn.fsf@paris.hilman.org> References: <200801301116.44902.rjw@sisk.pl> <924EFEDD5F540B4284297C4DC59F3DEE7202A0@orsmsx423.amr.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from gateway-1237.mvista.com ([63.81.120.158]:3261 "EHLO gateway-1237.mvista.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757649AbYAaSvH (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:51:07 -0500 In-Reply-To: <924EFEDD5F540B4284297C4DC59F3DEE7202A0@orsmsx423.amr.corp.intel.com> (Venkatesh Pallipadi's message of "Thu\, 31 Jan 2008 10\:44\:48 -0800") Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: "Pallipadi, Venkatesh" Cc: Len Brown , ACPI Devel Maling List "Pallipadi, Venkatesh" writes: >> Wrap cpu_idle_wait() in an x86 #ifdef since it's x86 only. >> Signed-off-by: Kevin Hilman >> >> diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c >> index d2fabe7..4d0f9b0 100644 >> --- a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c >> +++ b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c >> @@ -82,7 +82,9 @@ void cpuidle_uninstall_idle_handler(void) >> { >> if (enabled_devices && (pm_idle != pm_idle_old)) { >> pm_idle = pm_idle_old; >> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86 >> cpu_idle_wait(); >> +#endif >> > > The archs that do not have cpu_idle_wait() and has more than one CPU > will need something equivalent to cpu_idle_wait() to kick all other CPUs > out of idle loop. > The reason being we do not want another CPU to be in idle loop that is > being uninstalled here. > > Do you have more than one logical CPU on your platform? No, I'm testing on a UP ARM-based platform (TI OMAP.) Maybe #ifdef CONFIG_SMP is the right thing instead of #ifdef CONFIG_X86? Kevin