> -----Original Message----- > From: Dasgupta, Romit > Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2009 12:18 PM > To: Woodruff, Richard; Premi, Sanjeev; linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: RE: omap3 cpuidle interrupt latency > > It would be nice if this device could dynamically set > constraints (say by using a short kernel timer during > activity or set/remove pm_qos latency) or the prediction > aspect of cpuidle could be improved using rules feed from > things like interrupt source. Despite all constraints; the latency concern is still valid. The constraints would either prevent idle state transition; or in the idle processing we could still have repeat of current situation - though less often. I feel checking for pending interrupt before executing WFI would help. Will try in the morning. > [Romit] I was thinking that in the irq handler we should add > a requirement via the pm_qos or via the constraint framework > (not sure if linux-omap has this) and set some kind of a > timer (the idea is to keep arming the timer for clustered or > rather closely spaced irq instances). If after a while the > timer expires we release the latency req. This way perhaps we > can handle the latency problem. Again, I am not sure why the > menu governor only looks into the PM_QOS_CPU_DMA_LATENCY > class only. I was thinking that it should look into other > classes as well. > > Thanks, > -Romit-- 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
