From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@linaro.org>,
linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] ARM: get rid of arch_cpu_idle_prepare()
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 18:30:46 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52E697C6.10809@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140127172110.GR15937@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
On 01/27/2014 06:21 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 06:12:53PM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> On 01/27/2014 05:07 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 09:22:55AM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>>>> On 01/27/2014 07:08 AM, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
>>>>> ARM and ARM64 are the only two architectures implementing
>>>>> arch_cpu_idle_prepare() simply to call local_fiq_enable().
>>>>>
>>>>> We have secondary_start_kernel() already calling local_fiq_enable() and
>>>>> this is done a second time in arch_cpu_idle_prepare() in that case. And
>>>>> enabling FIQs has nothing to do with idling the CPU to start with.
>>>>>
>>>>> So let's introduce init_fiq_boot_cpu() to take care of FIQs on the boot
>>>>> CPU and remove arch_cpu_idle_prepare(). This is now done a bit earlier
>>>>> at late_initcall time but this shouldn't make a difference in practice
>>>>> i.e. when FIQs are actually used.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@linaro.org>
>>>>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
>>>
>>> What kind of review did you do when giving that attributation?
>>
>> I did the review to the best of my knowledge and with good will.
>>
>> I read your comment on this patch and I learnt one more thing.
>>
>> Today, I am smarter than yesterday and dumber than tomorrow :)
>
> Just be aware that putting a comment along with the reviewed-by tag
> is always a good idea. I know that's a little more work, but this has
> been raised a number of times by various people over the years.
>
> A reviewed-by tag on its own doesn't mean much, as it could mean that
> you've just glanced over the code and decided "yea, it looks okay", or
> it could mean that you've spent all day verifying that the code change
> is indeed correct.
>
> Consequently, some will ignore emails which just contain a reviewed-by
> attributation.
Thanks for the clarification. I will take care of giving a comment next
time.
-- Daniel
--
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-27 17:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-01-27 6:08 [PATCH 0/9] setting the table for integration of cpuidle with the scheduler Nicolas Pitre
2014-01-27 6:08 ` [PATCH 1/9] ARM: get rid of arch_cpu_idle_prepare() Nicolas Pitre
2014-01-27 8:22 ` Daniel Lezcano
2014-01-27 16:07 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-01-27 17:12 ` Daniel Lezcano
2014-01-27 17:21 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-01-27 17:30 ` Daniel Lezcano [this message]
2014-01-27 17:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-27 12:45 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-01-27 15:45 ` Nicolas Pitre
2014-01-27 16:06 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-01-27 17:36 ` Nicolas Pitre
2014-01-27 6:08 ` [PATCH 2/9] ARM64: " Nicolas Pitre
2014-01-27 8:23 ` Daniel Lezcano
2014-01-27 15:43 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-01-27 15:51 ` Nicolas Pitre
2014-01-27 15:57 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-01-27 6:08 ` [PATCH 3/9] idle: no more arch_cpu_idle_prepare() users Nicolas Pitre
2014-01-27 8:24 ` Daniel Lezcano
2014-01-27 6:08 ` [PATCH 4/9] idle: move the cpuidle entry point to the generic idle loop Nicolas Pitre
2014-01-27 8:32 ` Daniel Lezcano
2014-01-27 6:08 ` [PATCH 5/9] ARM: remove redundant cpuidle_idle_call() Nicolas Pitre
2014-01-27 8:33 ` Daniel Lezcano
2014-01-27 6:08 ` [PATCH 6/9] PPC: " Nicolas Pitre
2014-01-27 8:35 ` Daniel Lezcano
2014-01-27 11:59 ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-01-27 6:08 ` [PATCH 7/9] SH: " Nicolas Pitre
2014-01-27 8:35 ` Daniel Lezcano
2014-01-27 6:08 ` [PATCH 8/9] X86: " Nicolas Pitre
2014-01-27 8:43 ` Daniel Lezcano
2014-01-27 6:08 ` [PATCH 9/9] cpu/idle.c: move to sched/idle.c Nicolas Pitre
2014-01-27 12:47 ` [PATCH 0/9] setting the table for integration of cpuidle with the scheduler Peter Zijlstra
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=52E697C6.10809@linaro.org \
--to=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=lethal@linux-sh.org \
--cc=linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=nicolas.pitre@linaro.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).