From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753599AbbDNIb4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Apr 2015 04:31:56 -0400 Received: from e37.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.158]:56828 "EHLO e37.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752444AbbDNIbr (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Apr 2015 04:31:47 -0400 Message-ID: <552CD06D.9070701@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 14:01:41 +0530 From: Preeti U Murthy User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Shreyas B Prabhu , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Michael Ellerman CC: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] powerpc/powernv: Introduce sysfs control for fastsleep workaround behavior References: <1428976613-13007-1-git-send-email-shreyas@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1428976613-13007-4-git-send-email-shreyas@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <552CACD2.5060600@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <552CCB77.1000307@linux.vnet.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <552CCB77.1000307@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 15041408-0025-0000-0000-000009DD200F Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 04/14/2015 01:40 PM, Shreyas B Prabhu wrote: > >>> >>> By default, fastsleep_workaround_state = dynamic. In this case, workaround >>> is applied/undone everytime the core enters/exits fastsleep. >>> >>> fastsleep_workaround_state = applyonce. In this case the workaround is >>> applied once on all the cores and never undone. This can be triggered by >>> echo applyonce > /sys/devices/system/cpu/fastsleep_workaround_state >> >> I was wondering if we really need such an elaborate design for this >> sysfs file. Why not a sysfs file called fastsleep_workaround_apply_once, >> which is set to '0' by default and the only value that it can take is >> '1' ? The name easily implies that the workaround is applied only once >> if it is set. I can see that this can cut down a good chunk of code from >> this patch. I just didn't find too much value in having so much code for >> a simple 'on' knob. > > I was considering something similar too. But then moved to this format > as I thought this was unambiguous. Also moving to a binary attribute > will reduces code only in show_fastsleep_workaround_state which I don't > feel is much. > That said, if you feel strongly about it, I can change it to the format > you suggested. It cuts down two of your data structures: fastsleep_workaround_avail_states[] and the enum and the parsing of the input string in store_fastsleep_workaround_state() too. Regards Preeti U Murthy > > Thanks, > Shreyas > > _______________________________________________ > Linuxppc-dev mailing list > Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org > https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev >