From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752343AbcEKQ5f (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 May 2016 12:57:35 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:54066 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752008AbcEKQ5e (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 May 2016 12:57:34 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/5] ACPI / processor_idle: introduce ACPI_PROCESSOR_CSTATE To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" References: <1462981062-24909-1-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <1462981062-24909-2-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com> Cc: Sudeep Holla , ACPI Devel Maling List , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Vikas Sajjan , Sunil , Prashanth Prakash , Ashwin Chaugule , Al Stone , Lorenzo Pieralisi , the arch/x86 maintainers , "linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org" From: Sudeep Holla Organization: ARM Message-ID: <57336478.5050304@arm.com> Date: Wed, 11 May 2016 17:57:28 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11/05/16 17:23, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 5:37 PM, Sudeep Holla wrote: >> ACPI 6.0 adds a new method to specify the CPU idle states(C-states) >> called Low Power Idle(LPI) states. Since new architectures like ARM64 >> use only LPIs, introduce ACPI_PROCESSOR_CSTATE to encapsulate all the >> code supporting the old style C-states(_CST). >> >> This patch will help to extend the processor_idle module to support >> LPI. >> >> Cc: x86@kernel.org >> Cc: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org >> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" >> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla >> --- >> arch/ia64/Kconfig | 1 + >> arch/x86/Kconfig | 1 + >> drivers/acpi/Kconfig | 4 +++ >> drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c | 80 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- >> include/acpi/processor.h | 2 +- >> 5 files changed, 60 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/ia64/Kconfig b/arch/ia64/Kconfig >> index b534ebab36ea..e820670d7243 100644 >> --- a/arch/ia64/Kconfig >> +++ b/arch/ia64/Kconfig >> @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ config IA64 >> select ARCH_MIGHT_HAVE_PC_SERIO >> select PCI if (!IA64_HP_SIM) >> select ACPI if (!IA64_HP_SIM) >> + select ACPI_PROCESSOR_CSTATE if ACPI > > You don't need this -> > >> select ACPI_SYSTEM_POWER_STATES_SUPPORT if ACPI >> select ARCH_MIGHT_HAVE_ACPI_PDC if ACPI >> select HAVE_UNSTABLE_SCHED_CLOCK >> diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig >> index 2dc18605831f..cb3e14757c9c 100644 >> --- a/arch/x86/Kconfig >> +++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig >> @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ config X86_64 >> config X86 >> def_bool y >> select ACPI_LEGACY_TABLES_LOOKUP if ACPI >> + select ACPI_PROCESSOR_CSTATE if ACPI >> select ACPI_SYSTEM_POWER_STATES_SUPPORT if ACPI >> select ANON_INODES >> select ARCH_CLOCKSOURCE_DATA >> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig >> index b7e2e776397d..093bfcc4f9c3 100644 >> --- a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig >> +++ b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig >> @@ -213,6 +213,10 @@ config ACPI_CPU_FREQ_PSS >> bool >> select THERMAL >> >> +config ACPI_PROCESSOR_CSTATE >> + bool > > -> if you do "def_bool y" here. > I agree and I did exactly the same, but then was not sure on your preference. So dropped it :) -- Regards, Sudeep From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sudeep Holla Date: Wed, 11 May 2016 16:57:28 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/5] ACPI / processor_idle: introduce ACPI_PROCESSOR_CSTATE Message-Id: <57336478.5050304@arm.com> List-Id: References: <1462981062-24909-1-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <1462981062-24909-2-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Sudeep Holla , ACPI Devel Maling List , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Vikas Sajjan , Sunil , Prashanth Prakash , Ashwin Chaugule , Al Stone , Lorenzo Pieralisi , the arch/x86 maintainers , "linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org" On 11/05/16 17:23, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 5:37 PM, Sudeep Holla wrote: >> ACPI 6.0 adds a new method to specify the CPU idle states(C-states) >> called Low Power Idle(LPI) states. Since new architectures like ARM64 >> use only LPIs, introduce ACPI_PROCESSOR_CSTATE to encapsulate all the >> code supporting the old style C-states(_CST). >> >> This patch will help to extend the processor_idle module to support >> LPI. >> >> Cc: x86@kernel.org >> Cc: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org >> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" >> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla >> --- >> arch/ia64/Kconfig | 1 + >> arch/x86/Kconfig | 1 + >> drivers/acpi/Kconfig | 4 +++ >> drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c | 80 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- >> include/acpi/processor.h | 2 +- >> 5 files changed, 60 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/ia64/Kconfig b/arch/ia64/Kconfig >> index b534ebab36ea..e820670d7243 100644 >> --- a/arch/ia64/Kconfig >> +++ b/arch/ia64/Kconfig >> @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ config IA64 >> select ARCH_MIGHT_HAVE_PC_SERIO >> select PCI if (!IA64_HP_SIM) >> select ACPI if (!IA64_HP_SIM) >> + select ACPI_PROCESSOR_CSTATE if ACPI > > You don't need this -> > >> select ACPI_SYSTEM_POWER_STATES_SUPPORT if ACPI >> select ARCH_MIGHT_HAVE_ACPI_PDC if ACPI >> select HAVE_UNSTABLE_SCHED_CLOCK >> diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig >> index 2dc18605831f..cb3e14757c9c 100644 >> --- a/arch/x86/Kconfig >> +++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig >> @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ config X86_64 >> config X86 >> def_bool y >> select ACPI_LEGACY_TABLES_LOOKUP if ACPI >> + select ACPI_PROCESSOR_CSTATE if ACPI >> select ACPI_SYSTEM_POWER_STATES_SUPPORT if ACPI >> select ANON_INODES >> select ARCH_CLOCKSOURCE_DATA >> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig >> index b7e2e776397d..093bfcc4f9c3 100644 >> --- a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig >> +++ b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig >> @@ -213,6 +213,10 @@ config ACPI_CPU_FREQ_PSS >> bool >> select THERMAL >> >> +config ACPI_PROCESSOR_CSTATE >> + bool > > -> if you do "def_bool y" here. > I agree and I did exactly the same, but then was not sure on your preference. So dropped it :) -- Regards, Sudeep