Please could you add a comment in the code about which piece is specific to ARM, because its not obvious to me. Its not like there is a reference to WFI for example. It looks like this code could go in drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c
Yes, I agree. At the first glance, the code, as it is, could go in this file but more ARM specific code will be moved to this ARM generic code driver like device tree description and couple idle states. The init function would be more arch specific then.
Hi Daniel
There was a discussion about device tree bindings when i posted the kirkwood cpuidle driver, now in drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-kirkwood.c.
The conclusion was that pseudo devices, like cpuidle, do not have DT bindings. They can check of_machine_is_compatible(), like cpuidle-calxeda.c does, or they are platform drivers, which is what cpuidle-kirkwood.c is.
Even if DT binding was allowed, it again should not be ARM specific.
Are coupled idle states ARM specific?
Andrew