On Wednesday, November 14, 2012 05:56:30 PM Julius Werner wrote:
> Many cpuidle drivers measure their time spent in an idle state by
> reading the wallclock time before and after idling and calculating the
> difference. This leads to erroneous results when the wallclock time gets
> updated by anoth
>> drivers/idle/intel_idle.c | 14 +-
Acked-by: Len Brown
thanks!
-Len
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
On 11/15/2012 04:04 AM, Preeti Murthy wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The code looks correct and inviting to me as it has led to good cleanups.
> I dont think passing 0 as the argument to the function
> sched_clock_idle_wakeup_event()
> should lead to problems,as it does not do anything useful with the
> pas
On Wednesday, November 14, 2012 05:56:30 PM Julius Werner wrote:
> Many cpuidle drivers measure their time spent in an idle state by
> reading the wallclock time before and after idling and calculating the
> difference. This leads to erroneous results when the wallclock time gets
> updated by anoth
On 11/15/2012 02:56 AM, Julius Werner wrote:
> Many cpuidle drivers measure their time spent in an idle state by
> reading the wallclock time before and after idling and calculating the
> difference. This leads to erroneous results when the wallclock time gets
> updated by another processor in the
Hi all,
The code looks correct and inviting to me as it has led to good cleanups.
I dont think passing 0 as the argument to the function
sched_clock_idle_wakeup_event()
should lead to problems,as it does not do anything useful with the
passed arguments.
My only curiosity is what was the purpose o
Many cpuidle drivers measure their time spent in an idle state by
reading the wallclock time before and after idling and calculating the
difference. This leads to erroneous results when the wallclock time gets
updated by another processor in the meantime, adding that clock
adjustment to the idle st
> Maybe you can remove all these computations and set the flag
> en_core_tk_irqen for the driver ? That will be handled by the cpuidle
> framework, no ?
>
> Same comment for the intel_idle driver.
Yeah, I thought about that, too. I was a little too afraid of touching
the sched_clock_idle_wakeup_ev
On 11/13/2012 10:52 PM, Julius Werner wrote:
> Many cpuidle drivers measure their time spent in an idle state by
> reading the wallclock time before and after idling and calculating the
> difference. This leads to erroneous results when the wallclock time gets
> updated by another processor in the
On 11/14/2012 10:06 AM, Deepthi Dharwar wrote:
> On 11/14/2012 03:22 AM, Julius Werner wrote:
>> Many cpuidle drivers measure their time spent in an idle state by
>> reading the wallclock time before and after idling and calculating the
>> difference. This leads to erroneous results when the wallcl
On 11/14/2012 03:22 AM, Julius Werner wrote:
> Many cpuidle drivers measure their time spent in an idle state by
> reading the wallclock time before and after idling and calculating the
> difference. This leads to erroneous results when the wallclock time gets
> updated by another processor in the
Many cpuidle drivers measure their time spent in an idle state by
reading the wallclock time before and after idling and calculating the
difference. This leads to erroneous results when the wallclock time gets
updated by another processor in the meantime, adding that clock
adjustment to the idle st
12 matches
Mail list logo