RE: [PATCH] idle using PNI monitor/mwait (take 2)

[Nakajima, Jun]

We are doing this as defensive programming (because of bogus device
drivers, for example), like the other idle routines (default_idle, and
poll_idle) always do. 

BTW, I'm not sure that local_irq_disable() is really required below (as
you know, "sti" is hiding in safe_halt()).

void default_idle(void)
{
	if (!hlt_counter && current_cpu_data.hlt_works_ok) {
=>		local_irq_disable();
		if (!need_resched())
			safe_halt();
		else
			local_irq_enable();
	}
}

Thanks,
Jun


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Morton [mailto:akpm@xxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 10:14 AM
> To: Nakajima, Jun
> Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Saxena, Sunil; Mallick, Asit K;
> Pallipadi, Venkatesh
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] idle using PNI monitor/mwait (take 2)
> 
> "Nakajima, Jun" <jun.nakajima@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Attached is a patch that enables PNI (Prescott New Instructions)
> > monitor/mwait in the kernel idle.
> 
> Thanks, looks good.
> 
> Why is there a local_irq_enable() on entry to mwait_idle()?

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/