On 24 October 2012 17:21, Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilim...@ti.com> wrote:
> On Sunday 07 October 2012 01:13 PM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
>>
>> The ARM platforms take advantage of packing small tasks on few cores.
>> This is true even when the cores of a cluster can't be powergated
>> independently.
>>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guit...@linaro.org>
>> ---
>> arch/arm/kernel/topology.c | 5 +++++
>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/topology.c b/arch/arm/kernel/topology.c
>> index 26c12c6..00511d0 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/kernel/topology.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/topology.c
>> @@ -226,6 +226,11 @@ static inline void update_cpu_power(unsigned int
>> cpuid, unsigned int mpidr) {}
>> */
>> struct cputopo_arm cpu_topology[NR_CPUS];
>>
>> +int arch_sd_share_power_line(void)
>> +{
>> + return 0*SD_SHARE_POWERLINE;
>> +}
>
>
> Making this selection of policy based on sched domain will better. Just
> gives the flexibility to choose a separate scheme for big and little
> systems which will be very convenient.
I agree that it would be more flexible to be able to set it for each level
>
> Regards
> Santosh
>
>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
