[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091026075831.GB22625@elf.ucw.cz>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 08:58:31 +0100
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To: Arun R Bharadwaj <arun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@...ibm.com>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ibm.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [v9 PATCH 4/9]: x86: refactor x86 idle power management code
and remove all instances of pm_idle.
> > > +static int local_idle_loop(struct cpuidle_device *dev, struct cpuidle_state *st)
> > > +{
> > > + ktime_t t1, t2;
> > > + s64 diff;
> > > + int ret;
> > > +
> > > + t1 = ktime_get();
> > > + local_idle();
> > > + t2 = ktime_get();
> > > +
> > > + diff = ktime_to_us(ktime_sub(t2, t1));
> > > + if (diff > INT_MAX)
> > > + diff = INT_MAX;
> > > + ret = (int) diff;
> > > +
> > > + return ret;
> > > +}
> >
> > So we get this routine essentially 3 times. Is there no way to share
> > the code?
> >
>
> We can move this code to a common place, but that would mean exporting
> the idle function pointer to be called from within this routine, which
> is exactly what we wanted to avoid.
>
> Any suggestions are welcome.
You can just pass idle routine as a parameter...?
int common_idle_loop(struct cpuidle_device *dev, struct cpuidle_state
*st, void *idle(void))
...?
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
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