[PATCH 01/20] ARM: clean up idle handlers
shawn.guo at freescale.com
Sat Dec 24 20:42:28 EST 2011
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 04:47:30AM -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> Let's factor out the need_resched() check instead of having it duplicated
> in every pm_idle implementations to avoid inconsistencies (omap2_pm_idle
> was missing it already).
> The forceful re-enablement of IRQs after pm_idle has returned can go.
> The warning certainly doesn't trigger for existing users. Similar for
> the redundant local_irq_disable() call in the OMAP implementations.
> To get rid of the pm_idle calling convention oddity, let's introduce
> arm_pm_idle() allowing for the local_irq_enable() to be factored out
> from SOC specific implementations. The default pm_idle function becomes
> a wrapper for arm_pm_idle and it takes care of enabling IRQs closer to
> where they are initially disabled.
> And finally move the comment explaining the reason for that turning off
> of IRQs to a more proper location.
> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre at linaro.org>
> arch/arm/include/asm/system.h | 1 +
> arch/arm/kernel/process.c | 23 +++++++++++++++--------
> arch/arm/mach-omap1/pm.c | 19 ++++++-------------
> arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm24xx.c | 5 ++---
> arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm34xx.c | 7 +++----
> arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm44xx.c | 2 ++
> arch/arm/mach-s5p64x0/cpu.c | 16 +++++++---------
> 7 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
There is one more since v3.2-rc4, imx5_idle() in arch/arm/mach-mx5/mm.c
More information about the linux-arm-kernel