[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20180604114500.3rlpuso5aftesnf5@aksadiga.ibm>
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 17:15:00 +0530
From: Akshay Adiga <akshay.adiga@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
Cc: Abhishek Goel <huntbag@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, rjw@...ysocki.net,
daniel.lezcano@...aro.org, paulus@...ba.org, mpe@...erman.id.au,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stewart@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] cpuidle/powernv : Add Description for cpuidle state
On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 07:04:14PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> Is this a new property ? I'm not fan of adding yet another of those
> silly arrays.
>
> I would say this is the right time now to switch over to a node per
> state instead, as we discussed with Vaidy.
I posted the node based device tree here :
skiboot patch : https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/923120/
kernel patch : https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/5/30/1146
Do you have any inputs for this design ?
>
> Additionally, while doing that, we can provide the versioning mechanism
> I proposed so we can deal with state specific issues and erratas.
>
> Cheers,
> Ben.
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists