* Viresh Kumar <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 27 February 2015 at 17:21, Viresh Kumar <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Hi Thomas/Ingo,
> >
> > This is in response to the suggestions Ingo gave [1] on the shortcomings of
> > clockevents core's state machine.
> >
> > This first separates out the RESUME functionality from other states as its a
> > special case. Then it defines a new enum to map possible states of a
> > clockevent
> > device.
> >
> > Ideally it should only be available for the core, but as bL switcher is
> > using it
> > today, it is exposed in clockchips.h. That dependency will go away after
> > applying the Thomas's work (Sent out be Peter) and then we can move this
> > enum to
> > somewhere in kernel/time/.
> >
> > The last patch moves the legacy check to the legacy code.
> >
> > Please see if this meets your expectation or if you have some suggestions
> > on it.
> >
> > Rebased of tip/master as there were some dependencies:
> > 575daeea39a3 Merge branch 'tools/kvm'
> >
> > This along with migration of few clockevents drivers is pushed here:
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/vireshk/linux.git
> > clkevt/manage-state
> >
> > --
> > Viresh
> >
> > [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/2/20/107
> >
> > Viresh Kumar (3):
> > clockevents: Handle tick device's resume separately
> > clockevents: Manage device's state separately for the core
> > clockevents: Don't validate dev->mode against CLOCK_EVT_MODE_UNUSED
> > for new interface
>
> Ingo,
>
> Gentle reminder ping...
Yeah, so I'd like PeterZ to ACK/NAK this approach before I move
forward with the patches - but he's on the road right now, so it
will take a week I suspect.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
