From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 17:09:12 -0700 From: Tom Rini To: Matt Porter Cc: linuxppc-dev Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] idle loop changes Message-ID: <20020801000912.GG17472@opus.bloom.county> References: <20020731193200.GD17472@opus.bloom.county> <20020731142401.B5793@home.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20020731142401.B5793@home.com> Sender: owner-linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 02:24:01PM -0700, Matt Porter wrote: > On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 12:32:00PM -0700, Tom Rini wrote: > > > > The following is based on the final patch that Armin posted a short > > while back. What this does is allow for the power_save() function to be > > overridden, but still provide a 'sane' default. This moves the existing > > power_save() function into ppc6xx_idle.c, as after talking with Hollis, > > the function won't work as-is on Power3/iSeries (bits have moved or are > > non-existant). > > > > I'm not totally sure if it's better to do it this way, or to not provide > > a default power_save(), so that if we don't set pm_idle to something, we > > just never call power_save() (as opposed to a call, check for a bit & > > return). Comments? > > To build it on non-6xx you need to move the powersave_nap declaration > back to idle.c and extern it in ppc6xx_idle.c. It's required by > sysctl. Other than that, this will work. Bleah. I'm not sure if the sysctl is wrong or not right now. IIRC, powersave_nap is only actually made use of on pmac, and from what I remember of talking to Ben, it's only really an option on 6xx anyhow. But good spotting none the less. :) -- Tom Rini (TR1265) http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/ ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/