| To: | ricmm@gentoo.org |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] vr41xx: fix problem with vr41xx_cpu_wait |
| From: | Atsushi Nemoto <anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp> |
| Date: | Thu, 07 Aug 2008 02:10:57 +0900 (JST) |
| Cc: | yoichi_yuasa@tripeaks.co.jp, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, ralf@linux-mips.org |
| In-reply-to: | <20080806161710.GA22957@woodpecker.gentoo.org> |
| Original-recipient: | rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org |
| References: | <200808060440.m764eF9I021783@po-mbox303.hop.2iij.net> <20080806.223033.128619389.anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp> <20080806161710.GA22957@woodpecker.gentoo.org> |
| Sender: | linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org |
On Wed, 6 Aug 2008 16:17:10 +0000, Ricardo Mendoza <ricmm@gentoo.org> wrote: > I see, I hadn't read that thread before. Yoichi's rev of the patch > should go in but we should put some effort in finding a better route for > CPUs that are not forcefully aware by hardware of interrupts in their > wait call. > > Was some work ever done on Ralf's idea in the "WAIT vs. tickless kernel" > ML thread? Regarding patching the return from exception code to contain > a check for this particular loop. Yes. My last proposal is: http://www.linux-mips.org/archives/linux-mips/2007-11/msg00123.html To support vr41's standby instruction in same way, we might have to synthesise rollback_handle_int, etc. or r4k_wait at runtime... --- Atsushi Nemoto |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] vr41xx: fix problem with vr41xx_cpu_wait, Ricardo Mendoza |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH] vr41xx: fix problem with vr41xx_cpu_wait, Ralf Baechle |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] vr41xx: fix problem with vr41xx_cpu_wait, Ricardo Mendoza |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] vr41xx: fix problem with vr41xx_cpu_wait, Ralf Baechle |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |