[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131120165921.GT16796@laptop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2013 17:59:21 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: lenb@...nel.org, rjw@...ysocki.net,
Eliezer Tamir <eliezer.tamir@...ux.intel.com>,
Chris Leech <christopher.leech@...el.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, rui.zhang@...el.com,
jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com,
Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@...ine.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, hpa@...or.com,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] idle, thermal, acpi: Remove home grown idle
implementations
On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 08:40:49AM -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On 11/20/2013 8:04 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >This does not fully preseve existing behaviour in that the generic
> >idle cycle function calls into the normal cpuidle governed idle
> >routines and should thus respect things like QoS parameters and the
> >like.
>
>
> NAK on the powerclamp side.
>
> powerclamp MUST NOT do that....
> it is needed to go to the deepest state no matter what
> (this is for when your system is overheating. there is not a lot of choice
> here... alternative is an emergency reset that the hardware does for safety)
Then its a worse broken piece of shit than I thought it was.
The only way to do what you want is to pretty much do stop_machine().
There's no guarantee your current FIFO-50 tasks will ever get to run.
Also, since when does Intel hardware do emergency resets on thermal
events? It used to force throttle stuff.
--
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