From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
To: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>,
linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
sparclinux@vger.kernel.org,
Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Should SPARC use cpuidle?
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 20:36:09 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130212193609.GA15694@merkur.ravnborg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <511A83D8.7020202@kernel.org>
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 01:03:04PM -0500, Len Brown wrote:
>
> >> Can you please move the definition of sparc_idle to processor_32.h
> >> It is sparc32 specific - and then we do not need the __ASSEMBLY__ guards
> >> as the sparc32 variant are not used from assembler.
> >
> > sure, let me know if attached works.
>
> ugh, not accustomed to sending patches via thunderbird.
> hopefully this attachment works...
>
> >From 358ca5d7e02c4559ad3fbf8135421e4a3753e979 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
> Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 23:27:26 -0500
> Subject: [PATCH] sparc idle: rename pm_idle to sparc_idle
> Reply-To: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
> Organization: Intel Open Source Technology Center
>
> (pm_idle)() is being removed from linux/pm.h
> because Linux does not have such a cross-architecture concept.
>
> sparc uses an idle function pointer in its architecture
> specific code. So we re-name sparc use of pm_idle to sparc_idle.
>
> Maybe some day, SPARC will cut over to cpuidle...
>
> Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
> Acked-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Build tested - OK.
Acked-by: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-02-12 19:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20130211183409.7519b73ca320baeac5ec886f@canb.auug.org.au>
[not found] ` <51197D8B.6010407@kernel.org>
[not found] ` <20130212173505.GA2155@merkur.ravnborg.org>
2013-02-12 18:01 ` Should SPARC use cpuidle? (was: linux-next: build failure after merge of the final tree (acpi tree related)) Len Brown
2013-02-12 18:03 ` Should SPARC use cpuidle? Len Brown
2013-02-12 19:36 ` Sam Ravnborg [this message]
2013-02-12 19:42 ` Should SPARC use cpuidle? (was: linux-next: build failure after merge of the final tree (acpi tree related)) Sam Ravnborg
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=20130212193609.GA15694@merkur.ravnborg.org \
--to=sam@ravnborg.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=sparclinux@vger.kernel.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