Re: [PATCH] tick/powerclamp: Remove tick_nohz_idle abuse

2014-12-30 Thread Preeti U Murthy
Hi Jacob, On 12/23/2014 08:27 AM, Jacob Pan wrote: > On Sat, 20 Dec 2014 07:01:12 +0530 > Preeti U Murthy wrote: > >> On 12/20/2014 01:26 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >>> On Fri, 19 Dec 2014, Jacob Pan wrote: >>> On Thu, 18 Dec 2014 22:12:57 +0100 (CET) Thomas Gleixner wrote: >

Re: [PATCH] tick/powerclamp: Remove tick_nohz_idle abuse

2014-12-22 Thread Jacob Pan
On Sat, 20 Dec 2014 07:01:12 +0530 Preeti U Murthy wrote: > On 12/20/2014 01:26 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Fri, 19 Dec 2014, Jacob Pan wrote: > > > >> On Thu, 18 Dec 2014 22:12:57 +0100 (CET) > >> Thomas Gleixner wrote: > >> > >>> On Thu, 18 Dec 2014, Jacob Pan wrote: > OK I agree,

Re: [PATCH] tick/powerclamp: Remove tick_nohz_idle abuse

2014-12-19 Thread Preeti U Murthy
On 12/20/2014 01:26 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Fri, 19 Dec 2014, Jacob Pan wrote: > >> On Thu, 18 Dec 2014 22:12:57 +0100 (CET) >> Thomas Gleixner wrote: >> >>> On Thu, 18 Dec 2014, Jacob Pan wrote: OK I agree, also as I mentioned earlier, Peter already has a patch for consolidated

Re: [PATCH] tick/powerclamp: Remove tick_nohz_idle abuse

2014-12-19 Thread Thomas Gleixner
On Fri, 19 Dec 2014, Jacob Pan wrote: > On Thu, 18 Dec 2014 22:12:57 +0100 (CET) > Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > On Thu, 18 Dec 2014, Jacob Pan wrote: > > > OK I agree, also as I mentioned earlier, Peter already has a patch > > > for consolidated idle loop and remove tick_nohz_idle_enter/exit > >

Re: [PATCH] tick/powerclamp: Remove tick_nohz_idle abuse

2014-12-19 Thread Jacob Pan
On Thu, 18 Dec 2014 22:12:57 +0100 (CET) Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Thu, 18 Dec 2014, Jacob Pan wrote: > > OK I agree, also as I mentioned earlier, Peter already has a patch > > for consolidated idle loop and remove tick_nohz_idle_enter/exit > > call from powerclamp driver. I have been working o

Re: [PATCH] tick/powerclamp: Remove tick_nohz_idle abuse

2014-12-18 Thread Thomas Gleixner
On Thu, 18 Dec 2014, Jacob Pan wrote: > OK I agree, also as I mentioned earlier, Peter already has a patch for > consolidated idle loop and remove tick_nohz_idle_enter/exit call from > powerclamp driver. I have been working on a few tweaks to maintain the > functionality and efficiency with the con

Re: [PATCH] tick/powerclamp: Remove tick_nohz_idle abuse

2014-12-18 Thread Jacob Pan
t; Weisbecker; LKML; LKP; Zhang, Rui Subject: Re: [PATCH] > tick/powerclamp: Remove tick_nohz_idle abuse > > Hi Thomas, > > On 12/18/2014 04:21 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > commit 4dbd27711cd9 "tick: export nohz tick idle symbols for module > > use" was mer

Re: [PATCH] tick/powerclamp: Remove tick_nohz_idle abuse

2014-12-18 Thread Preeti U Murthy
Hi Thomas, On 12/18/2014 04:21 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > commit 4dbd27711cd9 "tick: export nohz tick idle symbols for module > use" was merged via the thermal tree without an explicit ack from the > relevant maintainers. > > The exports are abused by the intel powerclamp driver which implement

Re: [PATCH] tick/powerclamp: Remove tick_nohz_idle abuse

2014-12-18 Thread Thomas Gleixner
On Thu, 18 Dec 2014, Eduardo Valentin wrote: > > The real solution is to fix the powerclamp driver by rewriting it with > > a sane concept, but that's beyond the scope of this. > > > > Do you have suggestions on what exactly is the expected rewriting or the > correct sane concepts? There was qui

Re: [PATCH] tick/powerclamp: Remove tick_nohz_idle abuse

2014-12-18 Thread Eduardo Valentin
Hello Thomas, On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 11:51:01AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > commit 4dbd27711cd9 "tick: export nohz tick idle symbols for module > use" was merged via the thermal tree without an explicit ack from the > relevant maintainers. > This is a shame. Rui, do you have any comments on