[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <528B7433.7020507@linux.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 06:22:43 -0800
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, lenb@...nel.org,
rjw@...ysocki.net, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
CC: shaohua.li@...el.com, rui.zhang@...el.com,
jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com,
Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@...ine.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, hpa@...or.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, acpi, idle: Restructure the mwait idle routines
> diff --git a/drivers/thermal/intel_powerclamp.c b/drivers/thermal/intel_powerclamp.c
> index 8f181b3f842b..e8275f2df9af 100644
> --- a/drivers/thermal/intel_powerclamp.c
> +++ b/drivers/thermal/intel_powerclamp.c
> @@ -438,9 +438,7 @@ static int clamp_thread(void *arg)
> */
> local_touch_nmi();
> stop_critical_timings();
> - __monitor((void *)¤t_thread_info()->flags, 0, 0);
> - cpu_relax(); /* allow HT sibling to run */
> - __mwait(eax, ecx);
> + mwait_idle_with_hints(eax, ecx);
> start_critical_timings();
> atomic_inc(&idle_wakeup_counter);
> }
>
hmm I take it that mwait_idle_with_hints is the one that also checks need_resched() ?
if so... powerclamp may not want to use that (the whole point is to NOT give the cpu
to tasks!)
--
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