[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1502582422.20268.53.camel@linux.intel.com>
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2017 17:00:22 -0700
From: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@...l.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] ACPI / Sleep: Check low power idle constraints for
debug only
On Sun, 2017-08-13 at 00:37 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 5:59 PM, Srinivas Pandruvada
> <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 2017-08-12 at 16:27 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > [...]
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > +
> > > > +struct lpi_constraints {
> > > > + char *name;
> > > > + int min_dstate;
> > > If you store the handle here as well, you won't need to
> > > look it up every time _check_constraints() is called.
> > The reason I didn't keep handle here, I thought handle can be stale
> > or
> > change for PnP device on plug in and out. Is this not true?
> The handles don't go away on hot remove as a rule. That may only
> happen if tables get unloaded, but basically the constraints should
> not point to anything in a table that may go away.
So we don't need to worry about this case where tables gets unloaded
and replaced? This is in a debug path, so additional overhead of path
to handle conversion may not be significant.
Thanks,
Srinivas
Powered by blists - more mailing lists