On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 05:03:20PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:

On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 06:37:40PM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:

quoted

On Mon, Sep 01, 2014 at 04:28:42PM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:

quoted

This patch implements a generic CPU idle driver for ARM64 machines.

It relies on the DT idle states infrastructure to initialize idle
states count and respective parameters. Current code assumes the driver
is managing idle states on all possible CPUs but can be easily
generalized to support heterogenous systems and build cpumasks at
runtime using MIDRs or DT cpu nodes compatible properties.

The driver relies on the arm64 CPU operations to call the idle
initialization hook used to parse and save suspend back-end specific
idle states information upon probing.

Idle state index 0 is always initialized as a simple wfi state, ie always
considered present and functional on all ARM64 platforms.

Idle state indices higher than 0 trigger idle state entry by calling
the cpu_suspend function, that triggers the suspend operation through
the CPU operations suspend back-end hook. cpu_suspend passes the idle
state index as a parameter so that the CPU operations suspend back-end
can retrieve the required idle state data by using the idle state
index to execute a look-up on its internal data structures.

Reviewed-by: Ashwin Chaugule <redacted>
Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi <redacted>

This patch should be ready to go too, is it ok if I split the series
in arm64 arch specific patches (will ask Catalin to pull) and CPUidle ones
(inclusive of DT bindings and !!this patch!!) and send two separate pull
requests ?

If Daniel/Rafael don't have any objection, I can take the whole series
through the arm64 tree (it seems that patches have been already acked by
Daniel).

Thanks a lot Catalin. Since this one is a brand new CPUidle driver and it
follows a different pattern from arm legacy drivers I would like to get
Daniel's ack on this patch too before pushing it. For the records I have
just added two pr_err to signal driver probing error, ultraminor changes
that do not justify a repost.

If Samsung guys do not manifest themselves I would drop patch 8 from
the series till it gets tested and its patch dependency queued too.

Lorenzo