[RFC PATCH 0/8] Add common ARM cpuidle init code

Arnd Bergmann arnd.bergmann at linaro.org
Tue Jan 3 11:02:01 EST 2012


On Tuesday 03 January 2012, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> drivers/idle/intel_idle.c => drivers/cpuidle/intel.c
> drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c => drivers/cpuidle/acpi.c
> 
> arch/arm/mach-omap2/cpuidle34xx.c => drivers/cpuidle/omap-34xx.c
> arch/arm/mach-omap2/cpuidle44xx.c => drivers/cpuidle/omap-44xx.c
> arch/arm/mach-shmobile/cpuidle.c  => drivers/cpuidle/arm-shmobile.c
> arch/arm/mach-davinci/cpuidle.c => drivers/cpuidle/davinci.c
> arch/arm/mach-at91/cpuidle.c => drivers/cpuidle/at91.c
> arch/arm/mach-s3c64xx/cpuidle.c => drivers/cpuidle/s3c64xx.c
> arch/arm/mach-exynos/cpuidle.c => drivers/cpuidle/exynos.c
> arch/arm/mach-kirkwood/cpuidle.c => drivers/cpuidle/kirkwood.c
> arch/arcm/mach-msm/idle.S => drivers/cpuidle/msm.S
> 
> That could be a first step and then we move the other archs which could 
> be a bit more tricky like the powerpc.
> 
> Does it make sense ?

Sounds good to me. However, if any of the drivers can be built as
loadable modules, or if there is any intention to make them so,
the file name should be globally unique and follow a common naming
scheme, e.g. idle-intel.c, idle-acpi.c, ...

	Arnd




More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list