On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 14:06:55 -0800
"Pallipadi, Venkatesh" <[email protected]> wrote:
Please dont go off-list like this. I put Mark's original mailing list cc's
back.
>
> I will have to Nack this. The reason max_cstate was initentionally
> removed due to couple of reasons:
It broke userspace without any warning or migration period, afaict.
> 1) All in kernel users of max_cstate should rather be using
> pm_qos/latency interfaces. All such max_cstate usages must already be
> migrated.
That code isn't merged.
> 2) Supporting max_cstate as a dynamic parameter cleanly is no longer
> possible in acpi/processor_idle.c as the C-state policy has moved to
> cpuidle instead. It can be done if it is needed. But, just below patch
> will not really work with cpuidle.
>
> Selecting max_cstate at boot time as a debug option still works without
> this patch.
>
> So, just this patch will not get back the functionality with cpuidle.
> Infact changing it at run time will have no effect. Question however is:
> Is there a real need to revive this parameter so that user can change
> max_cstate at run time?
It is not known whether Mark is actually writing to this thing. Perhaps
read-only permissions would be a suitable fix?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
