From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] coupled cpuidle state support
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 09:53:50 +0100
Message-ID: <4EF2F01E.8060307@linux.intel.com>
References: <1324426147-16735-1-git-send-email-ccross@android.com>
	<4EF1A0B4.5080307@linux.intel.com>
	<CAMbhsRRP7s9xsHqxhb=iMfHAJFcqAea-6CDORZS34RCPNo+UWw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EF1AA8A.8060304@linux.intel.com>
	<CAMbhsRSNTUvou9Gf6T4Ggq=jfxsWUcn7M2yNsKQz6aNrt6gLDg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EF1CD49.9020800@linux.intel.com>
	<CAMbhsRRnKoR3YPWrZzVynVe+dcuU5v0siYvmp2vbBcS1hquC7Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EF2352C.3060102@linux.intel.com>
	<CAMbhsRSPCo9MSGp57Fv0sRdYUFcdwx8jEz1-CfX8LdKf8X4MVg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMQu2gxws83BUdj_eMbF0xpA1Mo_OA_MswE7KUm5pvbn3YbMuQ@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAMQu2gxws83BUdj_eMbF0xpA1Mo_OA_MswE7KUm5pvbn3YbMuQ@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/linux-pm>,
	<mailto:linux-pm-request@lists.linux-foundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/linux-pm/>
List-Post: <mailto:linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linux-pm-request@lists.linux-foundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm>,
	<mailto:linux-pm-request@lists.linux-foundation.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org
Errors-To: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org
To: "Shilimkar, Santosh" <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>
Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>, Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@linaro.org>, Colin Cross <ccross@android.com>, linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org

On 12/22/2011 9:35 AM, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote:

> Indeed. The SOCs, Arch's which does support low power
> state independently and doesn't need any co-ordination between CPU's
> will continue to work same way as before with this series.

btw I think you misunderstand; I don't object to a need for something
like this, I am just very concerned that this may not be possible to be
done in a race-free way.