Re: [Xen-devel] [V6] x86/cpuidle: get accurate C0 value with xenpm tool

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 21.05.15 at 10:48, <huaitong.han@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-05-21 at 07:50 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 21.05.15 at 08:40, <huaitong.han@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > @@ -329,7 +340,7 @@ static uint64_t acpi_pm_ticks_elapsed(uint64_t t1, 
>> > uint64_t t2)
>> >  }
>> >  
>> >  uint64_t (*__read_mostly cpuidle_get_tick)(void) = get_acpi_pm_tick;
>> > -static uint64_t (*__read_mostly ticks_elapsed)(uint64_t, uint64_t)
>> > +uint64_t (*__read_mostly ticks_elapsed)(uint64_t, uint64_t)
>> >      = acpi_pm_ticks_elapsed;
>> 
>> Why? (And if a change like this was needed, you'd have to rename
>> the symbol to become identifiable as cpuidle specific, just like its
>> neighbor is).
> For code compilation, because the ticks_elapsed in the middle of the
> cpu_idle.c will be used by print_acpi_power in the beginning of the
> cpu_idle.c, other solution is moving hunk not just the functions to
> right place.
> Accepted, the second solution will be used.

Just to avoid any doubt - if you move this, please also move
cpuidle_get_tick along with it.

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel