[PATCH v2] Add cpuidle support for at91

[Nicolas Ferre]

Albin Tonnerre :
 >> Just one precision: what is the difference, entering state0 with only
>> the current cpu_do_idle() that is activated by default ?
> 
> Sorry, I don't get what you mean. Would you mind elaborating a bit?

I guess that during idle time, even without the cpuidle infrastructure,
the SOC enters arch_idle() that calls cpu_do_idle().

So, now that I have your patch applied, I wonder what is the difference
between the old situation and the first state of the cpuidle table.

In other words, only state "wait-for-interrupt *and* RAM self refresh"
brings some more power saving. Indeed, cpu_do_idle() that correspond to
the "WFI" state was already the way of dealing with idle cpu, even
without your patch. Am I correct ?

Best regards,
-- 
Nicolas Ferre