[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <52F0FE9F.501@linux.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2014 06:52:15 -0800
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
To: Preeti U Murthy <preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, rjw@...ysocki.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, len.brown@...el.com
CC: benh@...nel.crashing.org, daniel.lezcano@...aro.org,
srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] cpuidle/governors: Fix logic in selection of idle
states
On 2/4/2014 12:35 AM, Preeti U Murthy wrote:
> The cpuidle governors today are not handling scenarios where no idle state
> can be chosen. Such scenarios coud arise if the user has disabled all the
> idle states at runtime or the latency requirement from the cpus is very strict.
>
> The menu governor returns 0th index of the idle state table when no other
> idle state is suitable. This is even when the idle state corresponding to this
> index is disabled or the latency requirement is strict and the exit_latency
> of the lowest idle state is also not acceptable. Hence this patch
> fixes this logic in the menu governor by defaulting to an idle state index
> of -1 unless any other state is suitable.
state 0 is defined as polling, and polling ALWAYS should be ok
--
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