From: daniel.lezcano@linaro.org (Daniel Lezcano)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the cpuidle-cons tree with the arm-soc tree
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 23:45:19 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F5A87FF.8060606@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMXH7KE5En7U-2zydT3MfJ7C7B164-zsQuBoHMUqzD-Kb_nh1w@mail.gmail.com>
On 03/09/2012 11:26 PM, Rob Lee wrote:
> Hello Stephen,
>
> Yes, your resolution looks correct to me.
For me too.
Thanks
-- Daniel
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 1:37 AM, Stephen Rothwell<sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>> Hi Rob,
>>
>> Today's linux-next merge of the cpuidle-cons tree got a conflict in
>> arch/arm/mach-at91/cpuidle.c between commit 00482a4078f4 ("ARM: at91:
>> implement the standby function for pm/cpuidle") from the arm-soc tree and
>> commit 7a1f6e72dce1 ("ARM: at91: Consolidate time keeping and irq
>> enable") from the cpuidle-cons tree.
>>
>> I fixed it up (I think - see below) and can carry the fix as necessary.
>> --
>> Cheers,
>> Stephen Rothwell sfr at canb.auug.org.au
>>
>> diff --cc arch/arm/mach-at91/cpuidle.c
>> index 555d956,d40b3f3..0000000
>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/cpuidle.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/cpuidle.c
>> @@@ -37,23 -33,15 +33,8 @@@ static int at91_enter_idle(struct cpuid
>> struct cpuidle_driver *drv,
>> int index)
>> {
>> - struct timeval before, after;
>> - int idle_time;
>> -
>> - local_irq_disable();
>> - do_gettimeofday(&before);
>> - if (index == 0)
>> - /* Wait for interrupt state */
>> - cpu_do_idle();
>> - else if (index == 1)
>> - at91_standby();
>> - u32 saved_lpr;
>> -
>> - __asm__("b 1f; .align 5; 1:\n"
>> - " mcr p15, 0, r0, c7, c10, 4"); /* drain write buffer */
>> -
>> - saved_lpr = sdram_selfrefresh_enable();
>> - cpu_do_idle();
>> - sdram_selfrefresh_disable(saved_lpr);
>> ++ at91_standby();
>>
>> - do_gettimeofday(&after);
>> - local_irq_enable();
>> - idle_time = (after.tv_sec - before.tv_sec) * USEC_PER_SEC +
>> - (after.tv_usec - before.tv_usec);
>> -
>> - dev->last_residency = idle_time;
>> return index;
>> }
>>
--
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-09 22:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-09 7:37 linux-next: manual merge of the cpuidle-cons tree with the arm-soc tree Stephen Rothwell
2012-03-09 22:26 ` Rob Lee
2012-03-09 22:45 ` Daniel Lezcano [this message]
2012-03-12 16:05 ` Nicolas Ferre
2012-03-12 17:03 ` Rob Lee
2012-03-12 23:06 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-03-13 1:50 ` Rob Lee
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=4F5A87FF.8060606@linaro.org \
--to=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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).