From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC v2] ARM: amba: Remove AMBA level regulator support Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2012 22:27:50 +0100 Message-ID: <20120401212750.GE8971@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <1333306720-28344-1-git-send-email-broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="5xSkJheCpeK0RUEJ" Cc: Russell King , Grant Likely , Samuel Ortiz , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, spi-devel-general@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Linus Walleij Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-spi.vger.kernel.org --5xSkJheCpeK0RUEJ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Sun, Apr 01, 2012 at 09:22:50PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > Combined with the PL022 patch this causes a power regression since > the PL022 is hereafter always on. I guess this code isn't in mainline, though? In that case you can always add a revert of this commit to your out of tree patches if you need to. > But I guess if I fix a power domain patch to accomplish much the > same things then nothing is really lost... Let me know if you run into any trouble with that - I don't have any systems which could usefully use such support so I'm unlikely to work on it directly and from what you were saying you'll need to integrate with existing power domain code anyway. > And I do like the change, if for nothing else so for the fact that it > eventually pushes to power domains what belongs there, so: > Acked-by: Linus Walleij Thanks. > But to the defence: power domain code was not in the kernel > when the AMBA "vcore" regulator was introduced so how else > could we do it... except for inventing power domains... Which might've happened sooner if we'd noticed :) There were some other platforms doing similar things but they mostly used the clock API since it was always entirely platform code until 3.4 so they're less intrusive into the generic code. --5xSkJheCpeK0RUEJ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJPeMhQAAoJEBus8iNuMP3d4eQQAIXgUP1oSjA9sc7Sqv3ps+G3 OC12Dy8t+DxjhqTjFZKgr/a4GSsEZUA3ZUZSt+bSoGhbUms93IXpAESq6VQySFLs tnEft6lcMt5+/ABkQGehj0QUjXqfmcXG7oxaeJQ3nBN0E//RwN/e5BR6lgQ+NDWp 8Jg5toioqrXB1cR2aKUdx4iooPqAMs9TRbo6t2QlXqtnckD7DF/QSWkHi03zY1Zk K643LgibaCM7LCe9OJPMWr88NW2LBrioh4AXB6ym1kxg0sLc/ZQVwnQLu0aYKMHj sFtD+W3XscfWoItQTmqGVEBMkArboNChrogo3S8oNM0t3ciPZe5KoG3FrEFWnRZB XYH4yuzmj0WJKCdKNvZKmc9GtVlcKwkzJ+Dz3gKeKK4dJM951GdSr1WMG+BpLLRl 9RrR/U8MTqcYBy9sRDhOWxnTdJ2uJ1jH9Soi4x1mfATWwk4v2idz/6vsU0wfkQYs ZeNNwrMLknj1lFJw2aZYCymIQShVfjgH0LXS4gHlB0454pAkocP/JsuzKIGyy3f9 WFC4EU4gFZtF8Yjxf8qoJ+SBdJ5CVBKAPGJGnvb4kFH7PTtNAio/YdmCw4CCpEhp /FhBi2IKw2BEfuZI/j5Z5jsIQHS2rhsjhXR8SzpzwpGaSq5UoAUyCCkIR6mylPUL Td1EuX2iJ+pICIX49awJ =Q1pe -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --5xSkJheCpeK0RUEJ-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com (Mark Brown) Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2012 22:27:50 +0100 Subject: [PATCH/RFC v2] ARM: amba: Remove AMBA level regulator support In-Reply-To: References: <1333306720-28344-1-git-send-email-broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Message-ID: <20120401212750.GE8971@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Sun, Apr 01, 2012 at 09:22:50PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > Combined with the PL022 patch this causes a power regression since > the PL022 is hereafter always on. I guess this code isn't in mainline, though? In that case you can always add a revert of this commit to your out of tree patches if you need to. > But I guess if I fix a power domain patch to accomplish much the > same things then nothing is really lost... Let me know if you run into any trouble with that - I don't have any systems which could usefully use such support so I'm unlikely to work on it directly and from what you were saying you'll need to integrate with existing power domain code anyway. > And I do like the change, if for nothing else so for the fact that it > eventually pushes to power domains what belongs there, so: > Acked-by: Linus Walleij Thanks. > But to the defence: power domain code was not in the kernel > when the AMBA "vcore" regulator was introduced so how else > could we do it... except for inventing power domains... Which might've happened sooner if we'd noticed :) There were some other platforms doing similar things but they mostly used the clock API since it was always entirely platform code until 3.4 so they're less intrusive into the generic code. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: