> but now you're duplicating this functionality adding code for everyone.
quoted text
>
> 99.999% of the people today run cpuidle... (especially embedded x86 
> where they really care about power)
> all x86 going forward also has > 1 idle option anyway.
>
> and you're adding and extra layer in the middle that just duplicates 
> the layer that's in use in practice above it.
>
> seriously, this sounds like the wrong tradeoff to make.

I think the right option is still to put cpuidle on a diet.
There's no reason an idle handler needs to be that bloated.

If it was 2K or so just including it into the core would be fine.

Ignoring code size completely is generally a wrong trade off imho.

-Andi
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/