On 5/23/2012 12:10 AM, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > On 05/22/2012 07:58 PM, Sekhar Nori wrote: >> Hi Daniel, >> >> On 5/21/2012 3:37 AM, Daniel Lezcano wrote: >>> This patch removes the ops usage because we have the index >>> passed as parameter to the idle function and we can determine >>> if we do WFI or memory retention. >>> >>> The benefit of this cleanup is the removal of: >>> * the ops >>> * the statedata usage because we want to get rid of it in all the >>> drivers >>> * extra structure definition >>> * extra functions definition >>> * remove macro definition using BIT(0) >>> >>> It also benefits the readability. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano<daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Looks good to me. If there is no other plan, I will queue these two >> cpuidle patches for v3.6 through DaVinci tree. > > Cool ! > > Just a reminder, I don't have this board, so I was not able to test it. No problem. I tested that cpuidle enters state0 and state1 correctly after this change. I did not make any power measurements though. Thanks, Sekhar _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
