From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e28smtp05.in.ibm.com (e28smtp05.in.ibm.com [122.248.162.5]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "e28smtp05.in.ibm.com", Issuer "GeoTrust SSL CA" (not verified)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E66C52C00A8 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 19:59:57 +1000 (EST) Received: from /spool/local by e28smtp05.in.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 15:24:04 +0530 Received: from d28relay01.in.ibm.com (d28relay01.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.58]) by d28dlp01.in.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30BCEE004F for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 15:29:49 +0530 (IST) Received: from d28av01.in.ibm.com (d28av01.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.63]) by d28relay01.in.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id r6OA0eix23396362 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 15:30:40 +0530 Received: from d28av01.in.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d28av01.in.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id r6O9xh2j005669 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 09:59:44 GMT Message-ID: <51EFA559.9050601@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 15:28:49 +0530 From: Deepthi Dharwar MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michael Ellerman Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] cpuidle/powernv: cpuidle backend driver for powernv References: <20130723090111.7291.99479.stgit@deepthi.in.ibm.com> <20130723090137.7291.36657.stgit@deepthi.in.ibm.com> <20130723140645.GI31944@concordia> In-Reply-To: <20130723140645.GI31944@concordia> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 07/23/2013 07:36 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote: > On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 02:31:41PM +0530, Deepthi Dharwar wrote: >> This patch implements a back-end cpuidle driver for >> powernv calling power7_nap and snooze idle states. >> This can be extended by adding more idle states >> in the future to the existing framework. > > Other than the state table and a few minor details this looks almost > identical to the pseries driver. Can we not have a single version in > sysdev and isolate just the differences? > Hi Michael, Yes, I was actually looking at consolidating and moving all the powerpc cpuidle driver code to drivers/cpuidle/. sysdev also seems fine. Let me redo and club the drivers and have a single version of the code in sysdev for both powerpc and powernv platforms. Thanks ! Deepthi > cheers >