Re: [PATCH 16/21] cpuidle: avoid unnecessary kzalloc/free of structcpuidle_device_kobj

[Daniel Lezcano]

On 09/26/2013 08:05 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 26 September 2013 03:42, Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 09/22/2013 03:21 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > > We always need to allocate struct cpuidle_device_kobj for all CPUs and so there
> > > is no real need to have a pointer to it inside struct cpuidle_device.
> > >
> > > This patch makes a object instance of struct cpuidle_device_kobj inside struct
> > > cpuidle_device instead of a pointer.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > nack, it was made in purpose for kobject_init_and_add.
> >
> > see commit 728ce22b696f9f1404a74d7b2279a65933553a1b
>
> Ahh.. sorry for missing that one :(
>
> Now that I understand why it was introduced, I am thinking if
> we can make hotplug path a bit fast? By not freeing sysfs stuff
> and only hiding it for time being? And so we wouldn't be required
> to do unnecessary initialisations while coming back?
>
> Would that be worth it?

Yes if it possible.


--
 <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org â Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog

--
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/