Yong, On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 9:21 PM, Yong Shen <yong.s...@linaro.org> wrote: > Hi Arnaud, > I also took a while to think about this before posting patches. I prefer to > put it in board related code since the various PMIC used on each boards may > have influence on cpuidle latency or other charactors, although it could be > minor. WHy don't you define cpuidle_latency table per board file and use the right one inside the common cpuidle driver. Then you can take care of board related latencies cleanly.
Vishwa > Yong > > On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Arnaud Patard <arnaud.pat...@rtp-net.org> > wrote: >> >> yong.s...@linaro.org writes: >> >> Hi, >> >> > From: Yong Shen <yong.s...@freescale.com> >> > >> > Add cpuidle parameters to make cpuidle driver workable, but these >> > parameters need further tuning >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Yong Shen <yong.s...@freescale.com> >> > --- >> > arch/arm/mach-mx5/board-mx51_babbage.c | 114 >> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> > arch/arm/mach-mx5/devices.c | 4 + >> > arch/arm/mach-mx5/devices.h | 1 + >> > 3 files changed, 119 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >> >> I didn't look at how it's working nor did a review but from a very quick >> look, I'm wondering why it's in board-mx51_babbage.c. Can you explain to >> me what makes this code specific to babbage ? >> >> Arnaud > > > _______________________________________________ > linaro-dev mailing list > linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org > http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev > > _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
