[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150917091451.28ce10af@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 09:14:51 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@...vell.com>
Cc: <linux@....linux.org.uk>, <mingo@...hat.com>, <trenn@...e.de>,
<arjan@...ux.intel.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] arm: add cpu_idle tracepoints to arch_cpu_idle
On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 16:44:24 +0800
Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@...vell.com> wrote:
> Dear Steven,
>
> On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 16:07:44 +0800
> Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@...vell.com> wrote:
>
> > Dear all,
> >
> > On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 01:32:40 +0800
> > Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@...vell.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Currently, if cpuidle is disabled or not supported, powertop reports
> > > zero wakeups and zero events. This is due to the cpu_idle tracepoints
> > > are missing.
> > >
> > > This patch is to make cpu_idle tracepoints always available even if
> > > cpuidle is disabled or not supported.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@...vell.com>
> > > ---
> > > Since v1:
> > > - ignore arm_pm_idle.
> >
> > Something related: let's have a look at arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm34xx.c
> > the omap3_pm_idle(void) function, it uses trace_cpu_idle(), should we
> > use the _rcuidle version as below:
>
> 484546509ce5 ("x86/tracing: Denote the power and cpuidle tracepoints as
> _rcuidle()") make me think we need to fix omap3_pm_idle, right?
>
Probably. If those tracepoints can be called after rcu_idle_enter()
(see cpuidle_idle_call()), then yes.
-- Steve
--
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