From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753161AbbA0HMz (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Jan 2015 02:12:55 -0500 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:25113 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751308AbbA0HMx (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Jan 2015 02:12:53 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.09,473,1418112000"; d="scan'208";a="643047440" Message-ID: <54C73A72.7030005@linux.intel.com> Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 15:12:50 +0800 From: "Li, Aubrey" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Thomas Gleixner CC: Peter Zijlstra , "Brown, Len" , "alan@linux.intel.com" , LKML , Linux PM list Subject: Re: [PATCH v3]PM/Sleep: Timer quiesce in freeze state References: <54866625.8010406@linux.intel.com> <7916564.nnH80uMtkt@vostro.rjw.lan> <2433846.5N8KuFRAKW@vostro.rjw.lan> In-Reply-To: <2433846.5N8KuFRAKW@vostro.rjw.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2015/1/26 22:45, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Monday, January 26, 2015 03:15:43 PM Thomas Gleixner wrote: >> On Mon, 26 Jan 2015, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> >>> On Monday, January 26, 2015 10:40:24 AM Thomas Gleixner wrote: >>>> On Mon, 26 Jan 2015, Li, Aubrey wrote: >>>>> On 2015/1/22 18:15, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >>>>>> Can we please stop adding more crap to that notifier thing? I rather >>>>>> see that go away than being expanded. >>>>> >>>>> Are you referring to FREEZE_PREPARE or remove all of FREEZE staff at all? >>>>> >>>>> What's the disadvantage of adding more notifier? >>>> >>>> clockevents_notify() is not a notifier. Its a multiplex call and I >>>> want to get rid of it and replace it with explicit functions. >>> >>> OK, so perhaps we need to move _SUSPEND/_RESUME out of there to start with? >>> >>> As far as I can say, clockevents_notify(CLOCK_EVT_NOTIFY_SUSPEND, NULL) and >>> clockevents_notify(CLOCK_EVT_NOTIFY_RESUME, NULL) are each only called from >>> one place and moreover, since they are in syscore_ops, we don't need any >>> locking around them. >>> >>> So what about the patch below? >> >> I'm cleaning up the whole replacement of notify. The stuff below is >> part of it. >> >>> >>> - clockevents_notify(CLOCK_EVT_NOTIFY_SUSPEND, NULL); >>> + tick_suspend(); >>> + tick_suspend_broadcast(); >> >> That's exactly the stuff I don't want to see. Blind code >> move. > > At least it's clear what the patch does. :-) > >> tick_suspend_broadcast() wants to be called from tick_suspend(). > > OK > >> Still compiling and testing a gazillion of combinations. > > OK, so it looks like we need to wait with the suspend to idle changes until > this lands. Please cc the patches to me when you post. I'll refine the patch after that. Thanks, -Aubrey