Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 19 Jan 2016 14:14:59 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/2] cpuidle optimizations (on top of linux-next) | From | "Rafael J. Wysocki" <> |
| |
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote: > > * Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> wrote: > >> On 15/01/16 23:53, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> >Hi, >> > >> >When I was looking at the cpuidle code after the Sudeeps's problem report, >> >it occured to me that we had some pointless overhead there, so two >> >changes to reduce it follow. >> > >> >[1/2] Make the fallback to to default_idle_call() in call_cpuidle() >> > unnecessary and drop it. >> >[2/2] Make menu_select() avoid checking states that don't need to >> > (or even shouldn't) be checked when making the selection. >> > >> >> Tested-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> > > Rafael, can I pick these up into the scheduler tree?
They won't apply at this point as one commit they depend on is in my linux-next branch waiting for the next push.
Would it be a problem if they went in through the PM tree instead?
Thanks, Rafael
| |