On Friday, September 07, 2012, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Friday, September 07, 2012, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > > Currently we have the cpuidle_device field in the acpi_processor_power structure. > > This adds a dependency in processor.h for cpuidle.h. > > > > In order to be consistent with the rest of the drivers and for the per cpu states > > coming right after this patch, this one move out of the acpi_processor_power > > structure the cpuidle_device field. > > > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Acked-by: Peter De Schrijver <pdeschrijver@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Tested-by: Peter De Schrijver <pdeschrijver@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++++------- > > include/acpi/processor.h | 2 -- > > 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c b/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c > > index de89624..084b1d2 100644 > > --- a/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c > > @@ -79,6 +79,8 @@ module_param(bm_check_disable, uint, 0000); > > static unsigned int latency_factor __read_mostly = 2; > > module_param(latency_factor, uint, 0644); > > > > +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct cpuidle_device, acpi_cpuidle_device); > > + > > Well. Why are you moving that thing into the percpu memory? It doesn't > have to be per-CPU and storing it there just wastes the room. Sorry, it is per-CPU already, scratch that. Thanks, Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
