On Tuesday 26 October 2010 15:17:43 Thomas Renninger wrote: > On Tuesday 26 October 2010 13:54:22 Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Thomas Renninger <trenn@xxxxxxx> wrote: ... > If cpuidle is not registered, the events you get are arch specific. > I mean they are arch specific anyway, but with cpuidle you can > build up an arch independent userspace framework nicely by looking > up name/desc/power/... of an cpu_idle event in cpuidle sysfs as > described above. About cpuidle and cpu_idle events: There is some oddness that: arch specific code which registers for cpuidle has to throw the cpu_idle enter sleep state X event and the generic cpuidle framework triggers the "exit" event. So as there are only cpu_idle events in drivers/idle/intel_idle.c, but not in drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c, I expect that processor.ko idle driver is broken and only exit states are sent. Ideally all cpuidle events should be thrown in cpuidle.c like this: trace_processor_idle(target_state, smp_processor_id()); dev->last_residency = target_state->enter(dev, target_state); trace_processor_idle(PWR_EVENT_EXIT, smp_processor_id()); My patches do not touch this behavior. If, it was broken before. I'll look at it separately. Thomas -- 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