linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 5/5] ACPI : enable ACPI_PROCESSOR

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 27 Jun 2016 16:06:46 +0100
From:	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To:	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
	"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
	Vikas Sajjan <vikas.cha.sajjan@....com>,
	Sunil <sunil.vl@....com>,
	Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
	Prashanth Prakash <pprakash@...eaurora.org>,
	Al Stone <al.stone@...aro.org>,
	Ashwin Chaugule <ashwin.chaugule@...aro.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 5/5] ACPI : enable ACPI_PROCESSOR_IDLE on ARM64



On 27/06/16 16:05, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> On 06/27/2016 05:03 PM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>> Hi Daniel,
>>
>> On 27/06/16 15:33, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>>> On 06/14/2016 04:48 PM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>>>> Now that ACPI processor idle driver supports LPI(Low Power Idle), lets
>>>> enable ACPI_PROCESSOR_IDLE for ARM64 too.
>>>>
>>>> This patch just removes the IA64 and X86 dependency on
>>>> ACPI_PROCESSOR_IDLE
>>>>
>>>> Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
>>>> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
>>>> ---
>>>
>>> Hi Sudeep,
>>>
>>> now that ACPI processor supports ARM64 did you check the
>>> CPUIDLE_DRIVER_STATE_START trick in the code and its derivative ?
>>>
>>
>> No, that is used only for C-State and ARM64 doesn't support it.
>> Patch 1/5 puts all the C-State code under #ifdef so that it's not
>> compiled on ARM64.
>>
>>> I deleted the patch 2/5 but there is a place where:
>>>
>>
>> Sorry, I don't follow what you mean by that.
>
> I meant I just deleted from my mailbox the patch 2/5, so I can't do
> inline comment.
>

Ah ok, anyways LPI always starts from index 0. IIUC that was your main
concern.

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep