linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Shreyas B Prabhu <shreyas@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>
Cc: mpe@ellerman.id.au, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, benh@kernel.crashing.org,
	mahesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com, maddy@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] powerpc/powernv: Encapsulate idle preparation steps in a macro
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 20:23:24 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <56EC1664.8020905@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160317111534.GD28728@fergus.ozlabs.ibm.com>

Hi Paul,

On 03/17/2016 04:45 PM, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 05:52:59PM +0530, Shreyas B. Prabhu wrote:
>> Before entering any idle state which can result in a state loss
>> we currently save the context in the stack before entering idle.
>> Encapsulate these steps in a macro IDLE_STATE_PREP. Move this
>> and other macros to commonly accessible location.
> 
> There are two problems with this.  First, your new macro does much
> more than create a stack frame and save some registers.  It also
> messes with interrupts and potentially executes a blr instruction.
> That is not what people would expect from the name of the macro or the
> comments around it.  It also means that it would be hard to reuse the
> macro in another place.
> 
> Secondly, I don't think this change helps readability.  Since the
> macro is only used in one place, it doesn't reduce the total number of
> lines of code, in fact it increases it slightly. 

This patch was in preparation for support for new POWER ISA v3 idle
states. The idea was to have the common idle preparation steps in a
macro which be reused while adding support for the new idle states. With
this context do you think this macro with better comments make sense?


Thanks,
Shreyas

  reply	other threads:[~2016-03-18 14:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-02-29 12:22 [PATCH 0/3] powerpc/powernv: Cpuidle related cleanup Shreyas B. Prabhu
2016-02-29 12:22 ` [PATCH 1/3] powerpc/powernv: Move CHECK_HMI_INTERRUPT to exception-64s header Shreyas B. Prabhu
2016-03-17  5:21   ` Paul Mackerras
2016-02-29 12:22 ` [PATCH 2/3] powerpc/powernv: Encapsulate idle preparation steps in a macro Shreyas B. Prabhu
2016-03-17 11:15   ` Paul Mackerras
2016-03-18 14:53     ` Shreyas B Prabhu [this message]
2016-03-19  0:21       ` Paul Mackerras
2016-03-21 13:27         ` Shreyas B Prabhu
2016-02-29 12:23 ` [PATCH 3/3] powerpc/powernv: Refactor hypervisor state restore code Shreyas B. Prabhu
2016-03-10 10:45 ` [PATCH 0/3] powerpc/powernv: Cpuidle related cleanup Shreyas B Prabhu
2016-03-11  1:00   ` Michael Ellerman

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=56EC1664.8020905@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=shreyas@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=maddy@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=mahesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=paulus@ozlabs.org \
    /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).