Re: [PATCH 2/4] arm: dis-allow hotplug on MSM

[Daniel Walker <dwalker@codeaurora.org>]

On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 22:02 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > > > > > This is goodbye to s2ram support, AFAICT.
> > > > > 
> > > > > This depends on SMP tho. It's like saying,
> > > > > 
> > > > > depends on 
> > > > 
> > > > That's weird, there was more to this email..
> > > > 
> > > > It's like saying,
> > > > 
> > > > depends on SMP && HOTPLUG && EXPERIMENTAL && !ARCH_MSM
> > > > 
> > > > But ARCH_MSM has no SMP, so the whole thing should short circuit right
> > > > at the start. It's only when you bring in SMP that it get interesting.
> > > 
> > > If arch_msm has no SMP, then why is change needed?
> > 
> > I'm getting it ready for SMP .. It's not there yet but will be.
> 
> Ok. It makes sense, then.
> 
> > > (I was trying to warn you that you'll need HOTPLUG support to get SMP
> > > suspend support.)
> > 
> > Yeah, I'm aware of it.. We haven't implemented hotplug yet, so we don't
> > have suspend support yet for SMP.
> 
> Still, it might be better to just provide stubs that return -ENOTSUPP
> or something, and leave it enabled in config. Same results, you'll
> need to provide full functions in future, anyway, and no churn in
> shared config files.

That's actually what I had original, Russell offered this as an
alternative. Now that I think about the stubs tho, I'm not sure it's
that bad an idea. All the stubs would do is not put the core into a
lower powermode, but would allow suspend. It wouldn't be very
efficient , but suspend would work.

Daniel


-- 

Sent by a consultant of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.