From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757640AbYAGPIN (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Jan 2008 10:08:13 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754460AbYAGPH5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Jan 2008 10:07:57 -0500 Received: from rtr.ca ([76.10.145.34]:2190 "EHLO mail.rtr.ca" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753959AbYAGPH4 (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Jan 2008 10:07:56 -0500 Message-ID: <4782404B.704@rtr.ca> Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2008 10:07:55 -0500 From: Mark Lord User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Arjan van de Ven Cc: Andrew Morton , Venki Pallipadi , abelay@novell.com, lenb@kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, rjw@sisk.pl Subject: Re: + restore-missing-sysfs-max_cstate-attr.patch added to -mm tree References: <20071130142058.816d1693.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <924EFEDD5F540B4284297C4DC59F3DEE2FAEAF@orsmsx423.amr.corp.intel.com> <4750CC78.9070105@rtr.ca> <20071130190227.1976e682@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <4750D180.6080001@rtr.ca> <20071130191816.3e744205@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <4750D585.1030200@rtr.ca> <477C2143.8090406@rtr.ca> <924EFEDD5F540B4284297C4DC59F3DEE4FC485@orsmsx423.amr.corp.intel.com> <477C622F.6010304@rtr.ca> <20080104021619.GA15409@linux-os.sc.intel.com> <47814958.3070208@rtr.ca> <20080106231848.762e93c1.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080107060707.55af6d9c@laptopd505.fenrus.org> In-Reply-To: <20080107060707.55af6d9c@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Arjan van de Ven wrote: .. > if we take a step back; Mark afaics only wants to put 1 in there... > And that makes sense; either you want the "no latency" C1, or you want the lot > (esp given that C2 and deeper are at the whim of the bios, what they mean varies > over time. Actually even C1 does that on some AMD systems); > > Longer term I'd suggest we make an option that basically is "C1 only", > (or technically, "use hlt only") > that solves Marks VMWARE thing, and is a lot closer to what people really want. .. Yeah, that makes sense. > Well, that and if VMWARE really can't deal with latency in their kernel module > they should use the proper code for that. It's also a ton easier to implement, since > it basically is "don't use the CPUIDLE idle loop, but use the traditional hlt one" .. I don't think it's so much VMware itself, as it is the guest OS inside it. Cheers