Re: [PATCH 2/3] PERF(kernel): Cleanup power events

[Thomas Renninger <trenn@xxxxxxx>]

On Monday 25 October 2010 08:54:34 Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On 10/19/2010 4:36 AM, Thomas Renninger wrote:
> >   static void poll_idle(void)
> >   {
> > -	trace_power_start(POWER_CSTATE, 0, smp_processor_id());
> >   	local_irq_enable();
> >   	while (!need_resched())
> >   		cpu_relax();
> > -	trace_power_end(0);
> >   }
> 
> why did you remove the idle tracepoints from this one ???
Because no idle/sleep state is entered here.
State 0 does not exist or say, it means the machine is not idle.
The new event uses idle state 0 spec conform as "exit sleep state".

If this should still be trackable some kind of dummy sleep state:
#define IDLE_BUSY_LOOP 0xFE
(or similar) must get defined and passed like this:
trace_processor_idle(IDLE_BUSY_LOOP, smp_processor_id());
    cpu_relax()
trace_processor_idle(0, smp_processor_id());

I could imagine this is somewhat worth it to compare idle results
to "no idle state at all" is used.
But nobody should ever use idle=poll, comparing deep sleep states
with C1 with (idle=halt) should be sufficient?

    Thomas
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-trace-users" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html