On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Stephen Warren <swarren@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 10/15/2012 01:56 AM, Joseph Lo wrote: >> There is still one thing you should know. Because we are planning to >> upstream "CPUquiet" framework that is a CPU auto hotplug mechanism. It >> will auto hotplug the CPUs depends on the system is busy or not. So when >> system is idle, there will be only one CPU online (i.e, CPU0). The >> secondary CPUs will all be hot plugged (i.e, offline and power gate). We >> need to think about do we still need coupled cpuidle on Tegra30 if we >> are going to use "CPUquiet". > > CPUquiet isn't relevant at all. First, a user may presumably disable > CPUquiet's Kconfig option (it had better have one, and the system had > better work with it disabled). Second, even if CPUquiet is enabled, I > don't imagine there is a 100% guarantee that hot(un)plug will happen > before cpuidle kicks in, is there? Finally, is there any guarantee that > CPUquiet will actually be accepted upstream? CPUquiet is a glorified hotplug governor, and hotplug governors have been widely rejected upstream, so I wouldn't plan on seeing it accepted. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
