On Thu, 2012-09-06 at 16:06 +0200, Vitaly Wool wrote:
> Prevent unnecessary rfkill event generation when the state has
> not actually changed. These events have to be delivered to
> relevant userspace processes, causing these processes to wake
> up and do something while they could as well have slept. This
> obviously results in more CPU usage, longer time-to-sleep-again
> and therefore higher power consumption.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vitaly Wool <vitalywool@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Mykyta Iziumtsev <nikita.izyumtsev@xxxxxxxxx>
Looks fine to me, should I just pick it up?
johannes
> ---
> net/rfkill/core.c | 8 +++++++-
> 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/rfkill/core.c b/net/rfkill/core.c
> index 752b723..520617c 100644
> --- a/net/rfkill/core.c
> +++ b/net/rfkill/core.c
> @@ -256,6 +256,7 @@ static bool __rfkill_set_hw_state(struct rfkill *rfkill,
> static void rfkill_set_block(struct rfkill *rfkill, bool blocked)
> {
> unsigned long flags;
> + bool prev, curr;
> int err;
>
> if (unlikely(rfkill->dev.power.power_state.event & PM_EVENT_SLEEP))
> @@ -270,6 +271,8 @@ static void rfkill_set_block(struct rfkill *rfkill, bool blocked)
> rfkill->ops->query(rfkill, rfkill->data);
>
> spin_lock_irqsave(&rfkill->lock, flags);
> + prev = rfkill->state & RFKILL_BLOCK_SW;
> +
> if (rfkill->state & RFKILL_BLOCK_SW)
> rfkill->state |= RFKILL_BLOCK_SW_PREV;
> else
> @@ -299,10 +302,13 @@ static void rfkill_set_block(struct rfkill *rfkill, bool blocked)
> }
> rfkill->state &= ~RFKILL_BLOCK_SW_SETCALL;
> rfkill->state &= ~RFKILL_BLOCK_SW_PREV;
> + curr = rfkill->state & RFKILL_BLOCK_SW;
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rfkill->lock, flags);
>
> rfkill_led_trigger_event(rfkill);
> - rfkill_event(rfkill);
> +
> + if (prev != curr)
> + rfkill_event(rfkill);
> }
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_RFKILL_INPUT
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
