[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1249571622.32113.510.camel@twins>
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 17:13:42 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>,
Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>,
Joel Schopp <jschopp@...tin.ibm.com>,
"Brown, Len" <len.brown@...el.com>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ibm.com>,
"Pallipadi, Venkatesh" <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@...ibm.com>,
"Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...ibm.com>,
"linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] cpu: idle state framework for offline CPUs.
On Thu, 2009-08-06 at 17:03 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-08-06 at 10:03 +0530, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan wrote:
> > This was the
> > main objection to Venki's deepest sleep state for offline cpus patch.
>
> Well, my main objection was that is was a single raw function pointer
> without any management layer around it.
>
> We have the exact same mess with the idle routine - and that has bitten
> us in the past.
That said, I still think it makes sense to share this with the idle
routine, we can make some callbacks unsuitable for hot-unplug just fine.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists