From: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
To: mgross@linux.intel.com
Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@deeprootsystems.com>,
aili@codeaurora.org, dwalker@codeaurora.org, tiwai@suse.de,
bruce.w.allan@intel.com, davidb@quicinc.com, mcgrof@gmail.com,
pavel@ucw.cz, linux-pm <linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH]PM QOS refresh against next-20100430
Date: Mon, 3 May 2010 10:33:00 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100503103300.6330e522@bike.lwn.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100430212043.GA30315@linux.intel.com>
On Fri, 30 Apr 2010 14:20:43 -0700
mark gross <mgross@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> This patch changes the string based list management to a handle base
> implementation to help with the hot path use of pm-qos
Having taken a quick look, I think the API change makes a lot of
sense. Hot paths are one thing; avoidance of accidental conflicts
would be another.
One question, though... one clear use of this API is for drivers to
say "don't go into C3 or deeper because things go wrong"; I'm about to
add another one of those. It works, but the use of a
PM_QOS_CPU_DMA_LATENCY requirement with a hard-coded number that one
hopes is small enough seems a bit...indirect. I wonder if it would be
clearer and more robust to add a new requirement^Wrequest type saying
"the quality of service I need is shallow sleeps only"?
jon
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-05-03 16:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-04-30 21:20 mark gross
2010-04-30 22:13 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-04-30 23:05 ` mark gross
2010-04-30 23:08 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-05-04 14:30 ` mark gross
2010-05-05 23:59 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-05-03 16:33 ` Jonathan Corbet [this message]
2010-05-03 16:40 ` Kevin Hilman
2010-05-03 16:42 ` Jonathan Corbet
2010-05-03 17:01 ` Kevin Hilman
2010-05-03 17:10 ` Jonathan Corbet
2010-05-03 21:39 ` Matthew Garrett
2010-05-04 4:16 ` Pavel Machek
2010-05-04 4:41 ` [linux-pm] " mark gross
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-04-30 21:17 mark gross
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100503103300.6330e522@bike.lwn.net \
--to=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=aili@codeaurora.org \
--cc=bruce.w.allan@intel.com \
--cc=davidb@quicinc.com \
--cc=dwalker@codeaurora.org \
--cc=khilman@deeprootsystems.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=mcgrof@gmail.com \
--cc=mgross@linux.intel.com \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=tiwai@suse.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®