Re: [linux-pm] [RFC PATCH V3 4/4] cpuidle: Single/Global registration of idle states

[Kevin Hilman]

Hi Trinabh,

Trinabh Gupta <trinabh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

[...]

> I just wanted to get comments on the design and understand how it
> affects various architectures in question. It looks to me as if the
> design should be okay and infact better for architectures like ARM
> since they do not have different idle states for different cpus and
> thus do not require per-cpu registration.  Global registration would
> work and be simpler; please correct me if I am wrong.

Yes, I agree that the new design is better, I especially like that it's
more clear (and expected) that final state decision making is to be done
directly in the driver without the back-and-forth in the current setup.

Thanks,

Kevin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/