melwyn lobo <linux.melwyn@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Hey Kevin, > I would like to try out this patch in my platform see the benefits > that you are reporting. But there is one issue in this patch. You have > not initialized "hrtimer_timeout" variable. > This will always be 0 right ?. Correct. The generic code defaults to zero so that the default behavior with this patch is unchanged from previous behavior. In order to use this feature, your platform-specific code which creates your C-states sets the per-C-state timer values. Kevin > Thanks, > -M > > On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 11:36 PM, Chalhoub, Nicole <n-chalhoub@xxxxxx> wrote: >> Hi Deepthi, >> >>> >> Texas Instruments France SA, 821 Avenue Jack Kilby, 06270 Villeneuve Loubet. 036 420 040 R.C.S Antibes. Capital de EUR 753.920 >> >> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Deepthi Dharwar [mailto:deepthi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] >>> Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 12:13 PM >>> To: Hilman, Kevin >>> Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Arjan van de Ven; linux-arm- >>> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux- >>> pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Chalhoub, Nicole >>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] CPUIdle: Reevaluate C-states under CPU load to favor >>> deeper C-states >> >> [...] >>> By setting timers when we enter non-deepest C-state possible, such that >>> when it fires we >>> can re-evaluate and try moving into deeper and deeper C-states enhancing >>> the >>> power savings is a good feature to have. >>> >>> Looking at the current implementation, is it possible to have it as >>> configurable option >>> where one can enable/disable this functionality through the backhand >>> driver ? >> >> The timeout values of the c state timers are set in the backhand driver. >> By setting the timeout to 0 the timers will not fire so you'll not have this functionality enabled >> >>> Also I am thinking, instead of having them in governor >>> wouldnt it be a good idea to have it implemented in >>> the backhand driver itself ? >>> --Deepthi >> >> >> In fact each C-state had its own configurable timer, so it is a parameter characterizing a C-state as it is for the exit_latency and target_residency parameters. >> And we wanted the timer to fire only when we do not go in deep Cstate due to a high load. This decision is made in the CPU idle governor. So the functionality should be seen from the governor.. >> >> Thanks and Regards >> Nicole >> >> >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in >> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ > > _______________________________________________ > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel -- 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
