Re: [Question] PM-QoS: PM_QOS_CPU_DMA_LATENCY == interrupt latency?

[Ming Lei]

Hi,

On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 9:49 AM, Shaohua Li <shli@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> As Alan explained, PM_QOS_CPU_DMA_LATENCY is for dma snooping. For example,
> in x86, cpu snoop dma. when cpu is in idle state, cpu need snoop
> device dma activity, there
> is latency involved for idle state.
>

I see, thanks for your clarification.

I also have two further questions about it:

- Except for dma snooping purpose, are there any other cases in which
PM_QOS_CPU_DMA_LATENCY is required?

- Are all CPUs required to be involved to dma snoop? Or only one CPU
is enough? If one is enough, maybe we can allow other CPUs to reach
deeper idle state.


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