On 07/16/2014 03:02 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Wednesday, July 09, 2014 07:37:30 PM Saravana Kannan wrote:
Preliminary patch. Not tested. Just sending out to give an idea of what I'm
looking to do. Expect a lot more simplification when it's done.
Benefits:
* A lot more simpler code.
* Less stability issues.
* Suspend/resume time would improve.
* Hotplug time would improve.
* Sysfs file permissions would be maintained.
* More policy settings would be maintained across suspend/resume.
* cpufreq stats would be maintained across hotplug for all CPUs.
One problem. The real hotplug (when the CPU actually goes away) depends on
offline removing all that stuff for it. How are you going to address that?
Ok, I think I've figured this out. But one question. Is it possible to
physically remove one CPU in a bunch of "related cpus" without also
unplugging the rest? Put another way, can you unplug one core from a
cluster?
It's not too hard to support that too, but if it's not a realistic case,
I would rather not write code for that.
-Saravana
--
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
