>-----Original Message----- >From: Jesse Barnes [mailto:jbarnes@sgi.com] >Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2004 2:56 PM >To: davidm@hpl.hp.com >Cc: Alex Williamson; Seth, Rohit; linux-ia64 >Subject: Re: [PATCH] more robust halt_light > >On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 02:45:11PM -0800, David Mosberger wrote: >> Can we get rid of the CONFIG option too? Or do folks who care (too?) >> much about wake-up latency prefer to turn off a CONFIG option over >> booting with nohlt? > >Some people have come to me concerned about the wakeup latency of having >the halt call in there, and it also looks like the PAL has a bug on our >platform that causes hangs when we call PAL_HALT_LIGHT (which we're >tracking down), so I wouldn't mind if the config option stuck around a >little longer (or was a boot time parameter at least). > >Thanks, >Jesse As far as latency is concerned, do you have any specific workload that is getting impacted (severly) by this transition. I think we should remove the compile time CONFIG_OPTION for PAL_HALT_LIGHT. And instead use /proc interface to dynamically enable/disable the power transition. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.htmlReceived on Wed Mar 3 21:42:47 2004
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:24 EST