Re: [PATCH] Genericise CPUIdle for ARM big.LITTLE

2013-01-16 Thread Lorenzo Pieralisi
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 06:17:37PM +, Mark Hambleton wrote: > Hi Lorenzo, > > > > +obj-$(CONFIG_BIG_LITTLE) += arm_big_little.o > > There is nothing big.LITTLE specific in all of this, so arm_idle.c would > >be better. > > I figured that because the current version calls into the big.little

Re: [PATCH] clk: remove unreachable code

2013-01-16 Thread Rajagopal Venkat
On 16 January 2013 04:15, Mike Turquette wrote: > Quoting Rajagopal Venkat (2013-01-08 22:29:48) >> while reparenting a clock, NULL check is done for clock in >> consideration and its new parent. So re-check is not required. >> If done, else part becomes unreachable. >> >> Signed-off-by: Rajagopal

RE: [PATCH] Genericise CPUIdle for ARM big.LITTLE

2013-01-16 Thread Nicolas Pitre
On Wed, 16 Jan 2013, Mark Hambleton wrote: > > > > > +obj-$(CONFIG_BIG_LITTLE) += arm_big_little.o > > > > There is nothing big.LITTLE specific in all of this, so arm_idle.c would > > > >be better. > > > > > > I figured that because the current version calls into the big.little > > > platform po

Re: sched: Consequences of integrating the Per Entity Load Tracking Metric into the Load Balancer

2013-01-16 Thread Alex Shi
On 01/08/2013 04:41 PM, Preeti U Murthy wrote: > Hi Mike, > > Thank you very much for such a clear and comprehensive explanation. > So when I put together the problem and the proposed solution pieces in the > current > scheduler scalability,the following was what I found: > > 1. select_idle_sibl

Re: sched: Consequences of integrating the Per Entity Load Tracking Metric into the Load Balancer

2013-01-16 Thread Namhyung Kim
On Wed, 16 Jan 2013 22:08:21 +0800, Alex Shi wrote: > On 01/08/2013 04:41 PM, Preeti U Murthy wrote: >> Hi Mike, >> >> Thank you very much for such a clear and comprehensive explanation. >> So when I put together the problem and the proposed solution pieces in the >> current >> scheduler scalabil