On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 06:30:25PM +0100, Sebastian Capella wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I haven't heard back from anyone regarding my last request. If there are no
> objections, I'll go ahead and publish this patch to LKML and LAKML.
No objections from me, Sebastian. When you have time and the inclination
Hi,
I haven't heard back from anyone regarding my last request. If there are
no objections, I'll go ahead and publish this patch to LKML and LAKML.
Thanks,
Sebastian
On 29 May 2013 07:37, Sebastian Capella wrote:
> Hi Guys,
>
> Sorry, I think the conversation went pretty far from my patch.
>
Hi Guys,
Sorry, I think the conversation went pretty far from my patch.
Concerning my original patch, do you have any more ideas or concerns?
I'm not sure I have a clear idea what, if anything, needs to be changed.
I was able to verify it on the TC2 platform without issue.
Thanks again for all
Quoting Dave Martin (2013-05-22 11:22:36)
> Currently not. This partly depends on whether the target residency is
> supposed to be a hint about the rough order of magnitude of the expected
> idle period, or whether it's supposed to be a strict contract.
>
> In effect, I think it's a hint which st
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 02:08:29PM -0700, Sebastian Capella wrote:
> Thanks Liviu!
>
> Some comments below..
>
> Quoting Liviu Dudau (2013-05-21 10:15:42)
> > ... Which side of the interface are you actually thinking of?
>
> Both, I'm really just trying to understand the problem.
>
> > I don't
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 10:08:29PM +0100, Sebastian Capella wrote:
> Thanks Liviu!
>
> Some comments below..
>
> Quoting Liviu Dudau (2013-05-21 10:15:42)
> > ... Which side of the interface are you actually thinking of?
>
> Both, I'm really just trying to understand the problem.
>
> > I don't
Thanks Liviu!
Some comments below..
Quoting Liviu Dudau (2013-05-21 10:15:42)
> ... Which side of the interface are you actually thinking of?
Both, I'm really just trying to understand the problem.
> I don't think there is any C-state other than simple idle (which
> translates into an WFI for t
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 01:39:38AM +0100, Sebastian Capella wrote:
> Hi Nico, Liviu, Catalin,
Hi Sebastian,
>
> Do you expect there to also be cases where the PSCI interface may
> not be aware of all of the platform states?
Not sure why the PSCI interface would have a say here. It's only
an int
Hi Nico, Liviu, Catalin,
Do you expect there to also be cases where the PSCI interface may
not be aware of all of the platform states?
Eg. if you have an SOC, not all of the cstates and latencies are
directly related to the ARM core.. Maybe you can have
additional states and latencies accounting
