From: daniel.lezcano@linaro.org (Daniel Lezcano)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC][PATCH 0/7] OMAP4 cpuidle cleanup
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 17:42:27 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F6A04F3.6050306@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAORVsuUeE046O7YJ_fE49NbW1OjZHZX+GuNiDkF0AnzBnSMbxA@mail.gmail.com>
On 03/21/2012 02:43 PM, Jean Pihet wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Santosh Shilimkar
> <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> wrote:
>> Daniel,
>>
>> On Wednesday 21 March 2012 02:57 PM, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>>> This patchset is a proposition to improve a bit the code.
>>> The changes are code cleanup and does not change the behavior of the
>>> driver itself.
>>>
>>> A couple a things call my intention. Why the cpuidle device is set for cpu0 only
>>> and why the WFI is not used ?
>>>
>>> Daniel Lezcano (7):
>>> ARM: OMAP4: cpuidle - Remove unused valid field
>>> ARM: OMAP4: cpuidle - Declare the states with the driver declaration
>>> ARM: OMAP4: cpuidle - Remove the cpuidle_params_table table
>>> ARM: OMAP4: cpuidle - fix static omap4_idle_data declaration
>>> ARM: OMAP4: cpuidle - Initialize omap4_idle_data at compile time
>>> ARM: OMAP4: cpuidle - use the omap4_idle_data variable directly
>>> ARM: OMAP4: cpuidle - remove omap4_idle_data initialization at boot
>>> time
>>>
>> The series looks fine to me in general. This clean-up is applicable
>> for OMAP3 cpuidle code as well.
> Great!
> However OMAP3 has a few specific things that cannot be removed as easily:
> - the 'valid' flag is used because only certain combinations of power
> domains states are possible,
When I look the board-rx51 code I see:
static struct cpuidle_params rx51_cpuidle_params[] = {
/* C1 */
{110 + 162, 5 , 1},
/* C2 */
{106 + 180, 309, 1},
/* C3 */
{107 + 410, 46057, 0},
/* C4 */
{121 + 3374, 46057, 0},
/* C5 */
{855 + 1146, 46057, 1},
/* C6 */
{7580 + 4134, 484329, 0},
/* C7 */
{7505 + 15274, 484329, 1},
};
If C3, C4, C6 are not valid, so AFAICS never used in the cpuidle code
why the values are 'exit_latency' and 'target_residency' specified ? I
mean why don't we have { 0, 0, 0 } ? Is it just for information ?
I understand the purpose of this code but it looks a bit tricky and hard
to factor out. Is it acceptable to create a new cpuidle driver for rx51
then we factor out the code between omap3, omap4 and rx51 when all the
code consistent ?
> - the latency settings can be overriden by the board code, so the
> cpuidle_params struct is needed.
>
>> I want Jean to look at this series because some of his earlier
>> clean up has introduced those custom functions which
>> are getting removed in this series.
>>
>> Regards
>> santosh
>>
>>
>
> Thanks,
> Jean
--
<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:[~2012-03-21 16:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-21 9:27 [RFC][PATCH 0/7] OMAP4 cpuidle cleanup Daniel Lezcano
2012-03-21 9:27 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/7] ARM: OMAP4: cpuidle - Remove unused valid field Daniel Lezcano
2012-03-21 9:41 ` Shilimkar, Santosh
2012-03-21 9:46 ` Daniel Lezcano
2012-03-21 10:03 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2012-03-21 13:28 ` Jean Pihet
2012-03-21 9:27 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/7] ARM: OMAP4: cpuidle - Declare the states with the driver declaration Daniel Lezcano
2012-03-21 9:50 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2012-03-21 13:31 ` Jean Pihet
2012-03-21 14:12 ` Daniel Lezcano
2012-03-21 9:27 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/7] ARM: OMAP4: cpuidle - Remove the cpuidle_params_table table Daniel Lezcano
2012-03-21 9:27 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/7] ARM: OMAP4: cpuidle - fix static omap4_idle_data declaration Daniel Lezcano
2012-03-21 9:51 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2012-03-21 9:27 ` [RFC][PATCH 5/7] ARM: OMAP4: cpuidle - Initialize omap4_idle_data at compile time Daniel Lezcano
2012-03-21 9:27 ` [RFC][PATCH 6/7] ARM: OMAP4: cpuidle - use the omap4_idle_data variable directly Daniel Lezcano
2012-03-21 9:27 ` [RFC][PATCH 7/7] ARM: OMAP4: cpuidle - remove omap4_idle_data initialization at boot time Daniel Lezcano
2012-03-21 9:36 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/7] OMAP4 cpuidle cleanup Shilimkar, Santosh
2012-03-21 9:51 ` Daniel Lezcano
2012-03-21 9:56 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2012-03-21 10:43 ` Daniel Lezcano
2012-03-21 10:49 ` Shilimkar, Santosh
2012-03-21 10:59 ` Daniel Lezcano
2012-03-21 10:07 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2012-03-21 10:49 ` Daniel Lezcano
2012-03-21 13:19 ` Jean Pihet
2012-03-21 14:13 ` Daniel Lezcano
2012-03-21 14:23 ` Shilimkar, Santosh
2012-03-21 13:43 ` Jean Pihet
2012-03-21 14:19 ` Daniel Lezcano
2012-03-21 16:42 ` Daniel Lezcano [this message]
2012-03-21 21:54 ` Kevin Hilman
2012-03-21 22:20 ` Daniel Lezcano
2012-03-22 18:36 ` Kevin Hilman
2012-03-22 21:45 ` Daniel Lezcano
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=4F6A04F3.6050306@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).