From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <3D404F83.8010308@embeddededge.com> Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 15:20:35 -0400 From: Dan Malek MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Cc: Cort Dougan , Matthew Locke , akuster , linuxppc-dev Subject: Re: [RFC/Patch] 4xx idle loop References: <20020725105336.F2276@host110.fsmlabs.com> <20020725162026.19919@192.168.4.1> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Sender: owner-linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > Well, while I tend to agree with you on this, experience proved that > slightly abusing the ppc_md. indirection somewhat helped make the > code cleaner (read: more self-contained, less cruft, ...) All of the architectures except PowerPC seem to have a indirect pointer to a power saving idle function from the idle loop. If you don't want to follow this, we could have all of the board specific files contain a 'power_save()' function, which could be empty, always compile it and always call it. Today, the power saving stuff is all 6xx/7xx/Mac specific, which kinda needs to change if we want address the needs of embedded processors and products. -- Dan ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/