From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael Ellerman Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpuidle/powernv: Populate cpuidle state details by querying the device-tree Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 14:34:30 +1100 Message-ID: <1414380870.24967.0.camel@concordia> References: <20141014075259.11810.50996.stgit@preeti.in.ibm.com> <20141024143030.GA25966@red-moon> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from ozlabs.org ([103.22.144.67]:36939 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751998AbaJ0Deg (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Oct 2014 23:34:36 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20141024143030.GA25966@red-moon> Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: Lorenzo Pieralisi Cc: Preeti U Murthy , "rjw@rjwysocki.net" , "benh@kernel.crashing.org" , "shreyas@linux.vnet.ibm.com" , "linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" On Fri, 2014-10-24 at 15:30 +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 08:53:00AM +0100, Preeti U Murthy wrote: > > We hard code the metrics relevant for cpuidle states in the kernel today. > > Instead pick them up from the device tree so that they remain relevant > > and updated for the system that the kernel is running on. > > Device tree properties should be documented, and these bindings are > getting very similar to the ones I have just completed for ARM, > I wonder whether we should take the generic bits out of ARM bindings (ie > exit_latency) and make those available to other architectures. The firmware that emits those properties is already in the field, so it would have been nice to use a generic binding but it's too late now. cheers