[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150212131420.GW23123@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 14:14:20 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>,
"Li, Aubrey" <aubrey.li@...ux.intel.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen@...ux.intel.com>,
John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] PM / sleep: Re-implement suspend-to-idle handling
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 05:01:09AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> +/* Suspend-to-idle state machnine. */
> +enum freeze_state {
> + FREEZE_STATE_NONE, /* Not suspended/suspending. */
> + FREEZE_STATE_ENTER, /* Enter suspend-to-idle. */
> + FREEZE_STATE_WAKE, /* Wake up from suspend-to-idle. */
> +};
> +
> +static enum freeze_state __read_mostly suspend_freeze_state;
> +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(suspend_freeze_lock);
> +
> +bool idle_should_freeze(void)
> +{
> + return unlikely(suspend_freeze_state == FREEZE_STATE_ENTER);
> +}
I don't see how a compiler can propagate the unlikely through an actual
function call. AFAICT that needs to be an inline function for that to
work.
It would mean exposing suspend_freeze_state and the enum; is there a
reason not to want to do that?
--
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