Re: [PATCH] PM / QoS: unconditionally build the feature

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Friday, February 17, 2012, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Mon 2012-02-13 16:41:10, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Monday, February 13, 2012, Jean Pihet wrote:
> > > The PM QoS feature depends on CONFIG_PM which depends on
> > > PM_SLEEP || PM_RUNTIME. This breaks CPU C-states with kernels
> > > not having these CONFIGs.
> > > 
> > > This patch allows the feature in all cases.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Jean Pihet <j-pihet@xxxxxx>
> > > Reported-by: Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Mark Gross <markgross@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > Applied, but I modified the changelog (please have a look at the
> > linux-pm/pm-qos branch for details).
> 
> Is it good idea? For servers, power management / QoS is not
> neccessary... 

Yes, it is.  They surely use CPUidle.

Thanks,
Rafael
_______________________________________________
linux-pm mailing list
linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm


[Index of Archives]     [Linux ACPI]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [CPU Freq]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux