Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 12 Mar 2012 12:06:36 -0500 | Subject | Re: linux-next: manual merge of the cpuidle-cons tree with the tip tree | From | Rob Lee <> |
| |
Steven and Stephen,
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 7:35 AM, Steven Rostedt <srostedt@redhat.com> wrote: > On Fri, 2012-03-09 at 18:40 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> diff --cc drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c >> index 6588f43,56de5f7..0000000 >> --- a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c >> +++ b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c >> @@@ -92,15 -109,13 +109,13 @@@ int cpuidle_idle_call(void >> return 0; >> } >> >> - target_state = &drv->states[next_state]; >> - >> - trace_power_start(POWER_CSTATE, next_state, dev->cpu); >> - trace_cpu_idle(next_state, dev->cpu); >> + trace_power_start_rcuidle(POWER_CSTATE, next_state, dev->cpu); >> + trace_cpu_idle_rcuidle(next_state, dev->cpu); >> >> - entered_state = target_state->enter(dev, drv, next_state); >> + entered_state = cpuidle_enter_ops(dev, drv, next_state); >> >> - trace_power_end(dev->cpu); >> - trace_cpu_idle(PWR_EVENT_EXIT, dev->cpu); >> + trace_power_end_rcuidle(dev->cpu); >> + trace_cpu_idle_rcuidle(PWR_EVENT_EXIT, dev->cpu); >> > > Looks good. My change was just a rename of trace_power_* and > trace_cpu_*, and it looks like another change was the clean up of > target_state. This is a trivial conflict, and there should be no > surprises here. > > -- Steve >
Looks good to me as well.
Who should carry this fixup?
Best Regards, Rob
> > >> if (entered_state >= 0) { >> /* Update cpuidle counters */ > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |