On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 06:27:41PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote: > so it might not be that easy to switch it to use the easy > change I added as part of this RFC, but AFAIU it should be > the same idle mask, but this approach might be too naive > and miss some idle enter/exit paths.. CC-ing Frederic
Right, for RFC this will do; but I really want to avoid adding another global atomic bitmask on the idle path. In any case, I'll go look over the actual patches sometime soon, I still got a few other patches series to stare at first.
