RE: [PATCH 00/11] OMAP3 CPUidle patches - ver 2

["Rajendra Nayak" <rnayak@ti.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Woodruff, Richard [mailto:r-woodruff2@ti.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2008 6:06 PM
> To: Högander Jouni; Nayak, Rajendra
> Cc: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH 00/11] OMAP3 CPUidle patches - ver 2
> 
> > >> Doing this would make serial console to work faster.
> > >
> > > Yes, I removed these in my patches and put in the changes 
> suggested 
> > > by
> > Richard
> > > in 8250.c
> >
> > I doubt that your changes to 8250.c will be applied. I have 
> understood 
> > that omap specific changes are not accepted to generic 8250 driver. 
> > Anyway these changes doesn't help too much. Serial console is 
> > annoyingly slow if sleep while idle is enabled.
> 
> Rajendra is it slow in your current builds on this tree with 
> fixes in place?  Sluggish serial has NOT been an issue for us 
> in other trees for a long time.  Perhaps something is missing.

Yes, its indeed a bit sluggish in my builds as well. Not as good as what we
have in our internal tree. 

> 
> In general keeping code out of the C0 path is good.  What 
> ever method makes console serial usable and gets out of the 
> way fastest to get better power measurements in typical test 
> environment is good.
> 
> Is the comment on the smart idle / no idle aspect or the whole path?
> 
> It probably is easier to put changes in our local cpu_idle-C0 
> function as compared to a shared 8250 driver.  But if it 
> means adding extra code on a hot system path it is less appealing.
> 
> If it's working here, we can ask what opinions are on 
> ARM-Linux list. Today there are other UART instance specific 
> work arounds in that code.
> 
> Regards,
> Richard W.
> 
> 

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html