From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: santosh.shilimkar@ti.com (Santosh Shilimkar) Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 11:38:30 +0530 Subject: [PATCH v2] ARM: OMAP4: PM: Avoid expensive cpu_suspend() path for all CPU power states except off In-Reply-To: <874ngfrybz.fsf@linaro.org> References: <1360745724-30058-1-git-send-email-santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> <513DBB60.3010406@ti.com> <874ngfrybz.fsf@linaro.org> Message-ID: <5141695E.9070708@ti.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wednesday 13 March 2013 11:12 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote: > Santosh Shilimkar writes: > >> Kevin, >> >> On Wednesday 13 February 2013 02:25 PM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: >>> Current CPU PM code code make use of common cpu_suspend() path for all the >>> CPU power states which is not optimal. In fact cpu_suspend() path is needed >>> only when we put CPU power domain to off state where the CPU context is lost. >>> >>> Update the code accordingly so that the expensive cpu_suspend() path >>> can be avoided for the shallow CPU power states like CPU PD INA/CSWR. >>> >>> The patch has been tested on OMAP4430 and OMAP5430(with few out of tree patches) >>> devices for suspend and CPUidle. >>> >>> Cc: Kevin Hilman >>> >>> Reported-by: Richard Woodruff >>> Signed-off-by: Santosh Shilimkar >>> --- >>> Update changelog to include testing details as suggested >>> by Kevin Hilman. >>> >> Ping. >> It can get into rc's but since it is not strict regression, >> and if it has to wait for 3.10 then I can add this one >> along with rest of the PM patches posted towards 3.10 >> >> Either way, let me know. > > I have this updated one queued for v3.10 in my PM cleanup branch > (for_3.10/cleanup/pm) > Thanks Kevin. Regards, Santosh