From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.101.70]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E18E1A058C for ; Thu, 7 May 2015 19:56:51 +1000 (AEST) Message-ID: <554B36DD.5080807@arm.com> Date: Thu, 07 May 2015 10:56:45 +0100 From: Sudeep Holla MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Preeti U Murthy Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpuidle: Handle tick_broadcast_enter() failure gracefully References: <20150507052600.20882.39542.stgit@preeti.in.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <20150507052600.20882.39542.stgit@preeti.in.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Cc: "rlippert@google.com" , "daniel.lezcano@linaro.org" , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , "peterz@infradead.org" , "linus.walleij@linaro.org" , "rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "mingo@redhat.com" , Sudeep Holla , "tglx@linutronix.de" , "linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi Preeti, On 07/05/15 06:26, Preeti U Murthy wrote: > When a CPU has to enter an idle state where tick stops, it makes a call > to tick_broadcast_enter(). The call will fail if this CPU is the > broadcast CPU. Today, under such a circumstance, the arch cpuidle code > handles this CPU. This is not convincing because not only are we not > aware what the arch cpuidle code does, but we also do not account for > the idle state residency time and usage of such a CPU. > > This scenario can be handled better by simply asking the cpuidle > governor to choose an idle state where in ticks do not stop. To > accommodate this change move the setting of runqueue idle state from the > core to the cpuidle driver, else the rq->idle_state will be set wrong. > > Signed-off-by: Preeti U Murthy > --- > Based on linux-pm/bleeding-edge I am unable to apply this patch cleanly on linux-pm/bleeding-edge I think it conflicts with few patches that Rafael posted recently which are in the branch now. Regards, Sudeep