Jean Pihet <jean.pihet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Hi Kevin, > > On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 6:29 PM, Kevin Hilman <khilman@xxxxxx> wrote: >> jean.pihet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes: >> >>> From: Jean Pihet <j-pihet@xxxxxx> >>> >>> It is not needed to iterate through all the clock domains of a >>> power domain in order to allow or deny it to idle. >> >> Why? (I know the answer, but would like it answered here.) >> >>> This patch allows or denies only the first registered clock domain >>> of a power domain, and so optimizes the latency of the low power >>> code. The functions _cpuidle_allow_idle and _cpuidle_deny_idle are >>> not used anymore and so are removed. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Jean Pihet <j-pihet@xxxxxx> >> >> Other than the changelog update, it looks good but also needs a rebase >> like the previous patch. >> >> After that, I'll add them to my for_3.6/pm/performance branch and queue >> for v3.6. > The new series has been sent as '[PATCH 0/3] ARM: OMAP3: PM: optimize > cpuidle C1 state latency' with the suggested changes (changelog > updated, rebased on for_3.6/pm/performance). > > Note: with the code from the branch the CORE does not idle. The > optimization changes have been tested OK though. That's OK, I know the causes of the CORE idle retention problems and have fixes for those queued up. Thanks, Kevin -- 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
