On Sun, 2013-12-15 at 23:53 -0600, Wang Dongsheng-B40534 wrote:

quoted

-----Original Message-----
From: Bhushan Bharat-R65777
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2013 12:11 PM
To: Wang Dongsheng-B40534; Wood Scott-B07421
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: RE: [PATCH v5 4/4] powerpc/85xx: add sysfs for pw20 state and altivec
idle

quoted

quoted

Those codes just for discuss with Bharat. He want to make one flow at
"show_pw20_wait_time"/" show_altivec_idle_wait_time" function. If we
do that, we need to initialize pw20_wt/altivec_idle_wt.

I will keep this stuff at "show_pw20_wait_time"/"show_altivec_idle_wait_time"
and add a comment before our discussion.

/*
 * If the "value" less than 10, this will overflow.
 * From benchmark test, the default wait bit will not be set less than 10bit.
 * Because 10 bit corresponds to the wait entry time is 439375573401999609(ns),
 * for wait-entry-idle time this value looks too long, and we cannot use those
 * "long" time as a default wait-entry time. So overflow could not have

happened

quoted

 * and we use this calculation method to get wait-entry-idle time.
 */

I think now we will use same calculation code for default value and user set
value, so adding the comment is not sufficient, we should error out from the
code if value is less than 10. As default value is not less than 10 so this will
always work with default value but if user tries to set less than 10 then error
out and ask user to try more than 9.

Again, once the user has set up a time, the code will go to another branch.

else {
	time = pw20_wt;
}

We do so much for this a little function processing is not worth it. If we can't
agree on this sys interface. I will change this sys interface to show_pw20_wait_bit. :)

Please don't change it.

-Scott