Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 12 Jun 2017 21:17:45 +0200 | From | Daniel Lezcano <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] ARM: cpuidle: Support asymmetric idle definition |
| |
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 08:49:39PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Monday, June 12, 2017 05:55:10 PM Daniel Lezcano wrote: > > Some hardware have clusters with different idle states. The current code does > > not support this and fails as it expects all the idle states to be identical. > > > > Because of this, the Mediatek mtk8173 had to create the same idle state for a > > big.Little system and now the Hisilicon 960 is facing the same situation. > > > > Solve this by simply assuming the multiple driver will be needed for all the > > platforms using the ARM generic cpuidle driver which makes sense because of the > > different topologies we can support with a single kernel for ARM32 or ARM64. > > > > Every CPU has its own driver, so every single CPU can specify in the DT the > > idle states. > > > > This simple approach allows to support the future dynamIQ system, current SMP > > and HMP. > > > > Tested on: > > - 96boards: Hikey 620 > > - 96boards: Hikey 960 > > - 96boards: dragonboard410c > > - Mediatek 8173 > > > > Cc: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> > > Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> > > Tested-by: Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org> > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> > > There seems to have been quite some discussion regarding this one and I'm not > sure about the resolution of it. > > I'd feel more comfortable with an ACK or Reviewed-by from Sudeep or Lorenzo here.
I understand.
Sudeep it is ok with the patch [1] without an explicit acked-by.
-- Daniel
[1] https://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg2525980.html
| |