[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7h1tik2e5b.fsf@deeprootsystems.com>
Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 17:31:28 -0700
From: Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Cc: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Preeti U Murthy <preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
rlippert@...gle.com,
"linux-pm\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, Lina Iyer <lina.iyer@...aro.org>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] cpuidle: updates related to tick_broadcast_enter() failures
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net> writes:
> On Wednesday, May 13, 2015 05:13:27 PM Kevin Hilman wrote:
>> On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 5:16 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net> wrote:
>> > On Wednesday, May 13, 2015 03:59:55 PM Kevin Hilman wrote:
>> >> "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net> writes:
>> >>
>> >> [...]
>> >>
>> >> > Second, quite honestly, I don't see a connection to genpd here.
>> >>
>> >> The connection with genpd is because the *reason* the timer was
>> >> shutdown/stopped is because it shares power with the CPU, which is why
>> >> the timer stops when the CPU hits ceratin low power states. IOW, it's
>> >> in the same power domain as the CPU.
>> >
>> > Well, what if you don't have genpd on that system? Is the problem at hand not
>> > relevant then magically?
>>
>> Well, if you're not using genpd to model hardware power domain
>> dependencies, then yes you'll definitely need a different solution.
>>
>> And, as we discussed on IRC. If you only care about timers, and genpd
>> is not in use, then $SUBJECT series is a fine approach, and I have no
>> objections. But for SoCs where there are several other things that
>> share power with CPU, we need a more generic, genpd based solution,
>> which it seems we're in agreement on. And since the two approaches
>> are not mutually exclusive, then I have real objections to applying
>> this series.
>
> I guess a "no" is missing in the last sentence. ;-)
Correct. I have *no* real objections to applying this series.
Kevin
--
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