On 26 September 2013 03:52, Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezc...@linaro.org> wrote: > On 09/22/2013 03:21 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: >> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.ku...@linaro.org>
This deserved a log, sorry for missing that :( > The optimization sounds good but IMHO if we can move this state out of > the cpuidle common framework that would be nicer. > > The poll_idle is only applicable for x86 (acpi_driver and intel_idle), > hence I suggest we move this state to these drivers, that will cleanup > the framework code and will remove index shift macro > CPUIDLE_DRIVER_STATE_START which IMHO is weid and prone-to-error. Lets see what X86 folks have to say about it and then we can do it.. Btw, wouldn't that add some code duplication in those two drivers? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/