[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.20.13.2010121410490.15808@monopod.intra.ispras.ru>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 14:14:27 +0300 (MSK)
From: Alexander Monakov <amonakov@...ras.ru>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
cc: Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] intel_idle: mention assumption that wbinvd is not
needed
On Mon, 12 Oct 2020, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > @@ -20,7 +20,11 @@
> > * All CPUs have same idle states as boot CPU
> > *
> > * Chipset BM_STS (bus master status) bit is a NOP
> > - * for preventing entry into deep C-stats
> > + * for preventing entry into deep C-states
> > + *
> > + * CPU will flush caches as needed when entering a C-state via MWAIT
>
> I would rephrase this to mention that the above actually is an assumption.
This comment block is by itself a list of assumptions. It begins with heading
"Design Assumptions" and then lists two assumptions. This patch adds a third
one.
With that clarified, do you still need me to change this hunk?
>
> > + * (in contrast to entering ACPI C3, where acpi_idle driver is
>
> And mentioning acpi_idle here is not needed; it would be sufficient to
> say something like "in which case the WBINVD instruction needs to be
> executed to flush the caches".
I see, thanks, I will change this for v2 once the above is cleared up.
Thanks.
Alexander
Powered by blists - more mailing lists