> -----Original Message----- > From: Woodruff, Richard [mailto:r-woodruff2@xxxxxx] > Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2008 6:06 PM > To: Högander Jouni; Nayak, Rajendra > Cc: linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: RE: [PATCH 00/11] OMAP3 CPUidle patches - ver 2 > > > >> Doing this would make serial console to work faster. > > > > > > Yes, I removed these in my patches and put in the changes > suggested > > > by > > Richard > > > in 8250.c > > > > I doubt that your changes to 8250.c will be applied. I have > understood > > that omap specific changes are not accepted to generic 8250 driver. > > Anyway these changes doesn't help too much. Serial console is > > annoyingly slow if sleep while idle is enabled. > > Rajendra is it slow in your current builds on this tree with > fixes in place? Sluggish serial has NOT been an issue for us > in other trees for a long time. Perhaps something is missing. Yes, its indeed a bit sluggish in my builds as well. Not as good as what we have in our internal tree. > > In general keeping code out of the C0 path is good. What > ever method makes console serial usable and gets out of the > way fastest to get better power measurements in typical test > environment is good. > > Is the comment on the smart idle / no idle aspect or the whole path? > > It probably is easier to put changes in our local cpu_idle-C0 > function as compared to a shared 8250 driver. But if it > means adding extra code on a hot system path it is less appealing. > > If it's working here, we can ask what opinions are on > ARM-Linux list. Today there are other UART instance specific > work arounds in that code. > > Regards, > Richard W. > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
