On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 01:11:51PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Tuesday 08 February 2011, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 11:01:25AM +0000, Dave Martin wrote: > > > For v6, wfi is architected as a defined MCR instruction, so > > > use that definition. > > > > > > Doing a no-op instead of wfi() is probably bad, so for older > > > processors than v6, wfi() is not defined. If needed, some CPU- > > > specific wfi() will have to be defined elsewhere. > > > > This is something we kind-of already handle in a different way - see > > the individual processor idle function in arch/arm/mm/proc*.S. > > > > There's various errata work-arounds older CPUs need for wfi (or rather > > its mcr equivalent) so maybe wfi() should just be an alias for a call > > to that function. Or maybe we shouldn't have a wfi() macro at all. > > I don't see any users of the sev/wfe/wfi macros in the current kernel, > so removing them seems like a good strategy to avoid people from > using them incorrectly. That's because they've only just been added. See the massive 63-patch set from Viresh which has been posting to this mailing list. -- 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
