All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
To: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
	Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>,
	linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	sparclinux@vger.kernel.org,
	Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Should SPARC use cpuidle? (was: linux-next: build failure after merge of the final tree (acpi tree related))
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:01:31 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <511A837B.8020804@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130212173505.GA2155@merkur.ravnborg.org>

On 02/12/2013 12:35 PM, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
>>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
>>> ---
>>>  arch/sparc/include/asm/processor.h | 2 ++
>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/sparc/include/asm/processor.h b/arch/sparc/include/asm/processor.h
>>> index 34baa35..622cfa5 100644
>>> --- a/arch/sparc/include/asm/processor.h
>>> +++ b/arch/sparc/include/asm/processor.h
>>> @@ -7,6 +7,8 @@
>>>  #endif
>>>  
>>>  #define nop() 		__asm__ __volatile__ ("nop")
>>> +#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
>>>  extern void (*sparc_idle)(void);
>>> +#endif
>>>  
>>>  #endif
>>>
>>
>> Thank you Stephen!
>>
>> The last time I compiled a sparc kernel was in 1993:-)
>>
>> I've added your fix and Dave's Ack to this patch,
>> and updated it in my next branch.
> 
> Hi Len.
> 
> Can you please move the definition of sparc_idle to processor_32.h
> It is sparc32 specific - and then we do not need the __ASSEMBLY__ guards
> as the sparc32 variant are not used from assembler.

sure, let me know if attached works.

> Do you btw. have any hints how I can convert to the cpu_idle thing you hinted?

If you have exactly 1 idle state, then cpuidle isn't that interesting,
except, perhaps the standard residency counters.  If you have multiple
states to choose from, cpuidle becomes more valuable.

There are lots of cpuidle users now, including x86's intel_idle,
processor_idle, and the entire ARM tree.

In my tree right now is a patch to convert APM to cpuidle --
though as nobody has tested it yet I can't guarantee it is correct.

patches/issues related to idle should to to linux-pm@vger.kernel.org (on cc)

thanks,
-Len



WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
To: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
	Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>,
	linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	sparclinux@vger.kernel.org,
	Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Should SPARC use cpuidle? (was: linux-next: build failure after merge of the final tree (acpi tree r
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 18:01:31 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <511A837B.8020804@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130212173505.GA2155@merkur.ravnborg.org>

On 02/12/2013 12:35 PM, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
>>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
>>> ---
>>>  arch/sparc/include/asm/processor.h | 2 ++
>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/sparc/include/asm/processor.h b/arch/sparc/include/asm/processor.h
>>> index 34baa35..622cfa5 100644
>>> --- a/arch/sparc/include/asm/processor.h
>>> +++ b/arch/sparc/include/asm/processor.h
>>> @@ -7,6 +7,8 @@
>>>  #endif
>>>  
>>>  #define nop() 		__asm__ __volatile__ ("nop")
>>> +#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
>>>  extern void (*sparc_idle)(void);
>>> +#endif
>>>  
>>>  #endif
>>>
>>
>> Thank you Stephen!
>>
>> The last time I compiled a sparc kernel was in 1993:-)
>>
>> I've added your fix and Dave's Ack to this patch,
>> and updated it in my next branch.
> 
> Hi Len.
> 
> Can you please move the definition of sparc_idle to processor_32.h
> It is sparc32 specific - and then we do not need the __ASSEMBLY__ guards
> as the sparc32 variant are not used from assembler.

sure, let me know if attached works.

> Do you btw. have any hints how I can convert to the cpu_idle thing you hinted?

If you have exactly 1 idle state, then cpuidle isn't that interesting,
except, perhaps the standard residency counters.  If you have multiple
states to choose from, cpuidle becomes more valuable.

There are lots of cpuidle users now, including x86's intel_idle,
processor_idle, and the entire ARM tree.

In my tree right now is a patch to convert APM to cpuidle --
though as nobody has tested it yet I can't guarantee it is correct.

patches/issues related to idle should to to linux-pm@vger.kernel.org (on cc)

thanks,
-Len



  reply	other threads:[~2013-02-12 18:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 59+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-02-11  7:34 linux-next: build failure after merge of the final tree (acpi tree related) Stephen Rothwell
2013-02-11  7:34 ` Stephen Rothwell
2013-02-11 18:22 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2013-02-11 18:22   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2013-02-11 23:23 ` Len Brown
2013-02-11 23:23   ` Len Brown
2013-02-12 17:35   ` Sam Ravnborg
2013-02-12 17:35     ` Sam Ravnborg
2013-02-12 18:01     ` Len Brown [this message]
2013-02-12 18:01       ` Should SPARC use cpuidle? (was: linux-next: build failure after merge of the final tree (acpi tree r Len Brown
2013-02-12 18:03       ` Should SPARC use cpuidle? Len Brown
2013-02-12 18:03         ` Len Brown
2013-02-12 19:36         ` Sam Ravnborg
2013-02-12 19:36           ` Sam Ravnborg
2013-02-12 19:42       ` Should SPARC use cpuidle? (was: linux-next: build failure after merge of the final tree (acpi tree related)) Sam Ravnborg
2013-02-12 19:42         ` Should SPARC use cpuidle? (was: linux-next: build failure after merge of the final tree (acpi tr Sam Ravnborg
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2017-11-30  3:46 linux-next: build failure after merge of the akpm-current tree Stephen Rothwell
2017-11-30  3:46 ` Stephen Rothwell
2014-04-22  6:22 linux-next: build failure after merge of the audit tree Stephen Rothwell
2014-04-22  6:22 ` Stephen Rothwell
2014-04-22 15:56 ` Richard Guy Briggs
2014-04-22 15:56   ` Richard Guy Briggs
2014-04-22 16:32 ` Eric Paris
2014-04-22 16:32   ` Eric Paris
2014-04-22 21:27   ` Stephen Rothwell
2014-04-22 21:27     ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-06-12  4:54 linux-next: build failure after merge of the final tree (pci tree related) Stephen Rothwell
2012-06-12  4:54 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-06-12 15:31 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2012-06-12 15:31   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2012-06-12 15:31   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2012-06-13  0:50   ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-06-13  0:50     ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-06-13 23:20     ` Bjorn Helgaas
2012-06-13 23:20       ` Bjorn Helgaas
2011-06-09  7:27 linux-next: build failure after merge of the final tree (staging related) Stephen Rothwell
2011-06-09 18:41 ` Greg KH
2011-06-09 19:22   ` Greg KH
2011-06-10  6:05     ` Stephen Rothwell
2011-06-10  6:09       ` Stephen Rothwell
2011-06-10 22:34         ` Greg KH
2011-06-15  4:21           ` Stephen Rothwell
2011-06-16 19:14             ` Greg KH
2011-06-23  0:35               ` Stephen Rothwell
2011-06-23 21:51                 ` Greg KH
2011-06-24  0:00                   ` Stephen Rothwell
2011-06-27 21:45                     ` Greg KH
2011-06-28  0:16                       ` Stephen Rothwell
2011-06-15 12:05       ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2011-06-15 12:05         ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2011-06-15 15:47         ` Greg KH
2011-06-15 15:47           ` linux-next: build failure after merge of the final tree (staging Greg KH
2011-06-15 14:35       ` [PATCH] arch/tile: remove useless set_fixmap_nocache() macro Chris Metcalf
2011-06-15 14:35       ` Chris Metcalf
2011-06-15 14:35         ` Chris Metcalf
2011-06-15 14:35         ` Chris Metcalf
2011-06-15 14:35         ` Chris Metcalf
2011-06-09 19:52   ` linux-next: build failure after merge of the final tree (staging related) Henry Ptasinski
2011-06-09 20:19     ` Greg KH

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=511A837B.8020804@kernel.org \
    --to=lenb@kernel.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=len.brown@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sam@ravnborg.org \
    --cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
    --cc=sparclinux@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.