lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Feb]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 34/35] tick: Provide tick_suspend_local()
On Tue, 17 Feb 2015, Nicolas Pitre wrote:

> On Tue, 17 Feb 2015, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 12:15:09PM +0000, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> > >
> > > This function is intended to use by the freezer once the freezer folks
> > > solved their race issues. Also required to get rid of the ARM BL
> > > switcher tick hackery.
> >
> > Totally agree with the patch(es), but I noticed that the ARM bL switcher
> > does not depend on PM_SLEEP, so I do not think you can compile
> > tick_{suspend/resume}_local() out if !PM_SLEEP, unless dependency
> > is enforced by the ARM bL switcher config but I do not think that
> > the config dependency really exists, Nico please correct me if I am
> > wrong.
>
> The ARM bL switcher does not depend on PM_SUSPEND nor does it enforce it
> because it currently doesn't need it. So yeah, either PM_SUSPEND is
> selected bringing quite a lot of code with it, or another symbol is used
> for those functions (CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU maybe?).

Note the same problem exists with arch/x86/xen/suspend.c that calls
tick_resume_local() yet this file is not subject to a dependency on
CONFIG_PM_SUSPEND.


Nicolas


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-02-17 22:41    [W:0.222 / U:0.224 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site