Re: add lowpower_idle sysctl

[Zwane Mwaikambo]

On Wed, 17 Mar 2004, Andrew Morton wrote:

> "Kenneth Chen" <kenneth.w.chen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >  > > Logically it means a sysctl entry in /proc/sys/kernel.
> >  > Yes, but the *meanings* of the different values of that sysctl need
> >  > to be defined, and documented.  If lowpower_idle=42 has a totally
> >  > different meaning on different architectures then that's unfortunate
> >  > but understandable.  But we should at least enumerate the different
> >  > values and try to get different architectures to honour `42' in the
> >  > same way.
> >
> >  Writing to sysctl should be a bool, reading the value can be number of
> >  module currently disabled low power idle.  I think the original intent
> >  is to use ref count for enabling/disabling.  (granted, we copied the
> >  code from other arch).
>
> OK, so why not give us:
>
> #define IDLE_HALT			0
> #define IDLE_POLL			1
> #define IDLE_SUPER_LOW_POWER_HALT	2
>
> and so forth (are there any others?).
>
> Set some system-wide integer via a sysctl and let the particular
> architecture decide how best to implement the currently-selected idle mode?

I'm wondering whether the setting of these magic numbers can't be done
using cpufreq infrastructure.

-
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/