From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C660E3E9C0E; Tue, 9 Jun 2026 08:10:13 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1780992615; cv=none; b=Udw3xQ76C7MoR/9Sh66jUxuR0v63zwBLEj82CKpSf1M991hoNnkxhAG35xpAkCcafa3I40erTv7eu/fNMVtfXJD+vtYO5gWHx4wFCqt2IY1fSrljVN5/ekiW+WLdfxNtFTmodX6mDiJ5lwHeok1m9sB1eccOwI/0Di9xKJh/MNo= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1780992615; c=relaxed/simple; bh=o6XEB081Zn6a71wVbDe2KCxbKCNt14+1fzWvub9Gi/M=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=i8ejhgnaDSkw95iqkaIg4RxsFSnunknJ5zzUqqOUYw2Ip5bzxm4mTQnTbe5luhynEkP6qnLysAlWCELuvaS+pSCpAj3uPRt9R6Cv0T2ehVbaZmRR3cWOimeG3ReTuSiRa1QPdnYScUO5n5wGvyHpHfXFRO471by8gTfvimmp5mA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=arm.com header.i=@arm.com header.b=tT0cF06s; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=arm.com header.i=@arm.com header.b="tT0cF06s" Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21088236D; Tue, 9 Jun 2026 01:10:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.1.29.25] (e127648.arm.com [10.1.29.25]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B37DB3F93E; Tue, 9 Jun 2026 01:10:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=arm.com; s=foss; t=1780992612; bh=o6XEB081Zn6a71wVbDe2KCxbKCNt14+1fzWvub9Gi/M=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=tT0cF06ss2VfuAv/FPVUqlaky1WYy0K+T60POfNTxkmIHIaKEjMHDKUF1JrwlRqdd shumgbGZIfeCwYrEv4FEQibMLlZTgBNptMs7Nc7n8FdoYC3aW+FB74Ta01vqjUC5W+ KCtCSv0VyGEe4ktfTzYK1u0bXONwcywoe24FY0ms= Message-ID: Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2026 09:10:07 +0100 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] s390/tick: Remove CIF_NOHZ_DELAY flag To: Mete Durlu , Heiko Carstens , Vasily Gorbik , Alexander Gordeev , Sven Schnelle , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Daniel Lezcano , Anna-Maria Behnsen , Frederic Weisbecker , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner Cc: Ilya Leoshkevich , Christian Borntraeger , linux-s390 , linux-kernel References: <20260609075213.31094-1-meted@linux.ibm.com> <20260609075213.31094-2-meted@linux.ibm.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Christian Loehle In-Reply-To: <20260609075213.31094-2-meted@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 6/9/26 08:52, Mete Durlu wrote: > Remove obsolete tick delay heuristic [1]. The upcoming cpuidle driver > handles frequent sleep/wakeup cycles more effectively. > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20090929122533.402715150@de.ibm.com/ > > Suggested-by: Heiko Carstens > Signed-off-by: Mete Durlu > --- For bisectibility does it make sense to move this and 2/5 to the end?