[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170707010149.7526c784@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2017 01:01:49 +1000
From: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>
To: "Gautham R. Shenoy" <ego@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Michael Neuling <mikey@...ling.org>,
Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Shilpasri G Bhat <shilpa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Akshay Adiga <akshay.adiga@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] powernv:idle: Change return type of
pnv_probe_idle_states to int
On Wed, 5 Jul 2017 22:08:13 +0530
"Gautham R. Shenoy" <ego@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> From: "Gautham R. Shenoy" <ego@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
> In the current idle initialization code, if there are failures in
> pnv_probe_idle_states, then no platform idle state is
> enabled. However, since the error is not propagated to the top-level
> function pnv_init_idle_states, we continue initialization in this
> top-level function even though this will never be used.
>
> Hence change the the return type of pnv_probe_idle_states from void to
> int and in case of failures, bail out early on in
> pnv_init_idle_states.
>
> Signed-off-by: Gautham R. Shenoy <ego@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Looks good to me.
Reviewed-by: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>
I wonder if the warnings are strong enough here to let people know
idle won't be used so power consumption will be high and performance
significantly reduced on SMT machines?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists