Re: [PATCH 00/13] OMAP3: OFF mode fixes

[Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>]

Kevin Hilman had written, on 11/19/2010 03:20 PM, the following:

>> Request for testing this series for comparison between master and this
>> series requested for additional platforms where available.
> 
> I haven't yet been through the entire series, but some general comments
> to share before the weekend:
thanks for comments so far. I will wait for the complete series to be 
reviewed before reposting a v2.

> 
> The secure mode code is growing in size and complexity, so I think it
> should be removed from pm34xx.c and moved into it's own file
> (secure3xxx.c ?)   This will help keep pm34xx.c lean, and it can call
> into secure code as needed.    
IMHO - we should do that set of cleanups as part of Jean's patch series 
where we transition to sdram where possible - that will allow us to have 
C code replacement for sleep34xx.S and optimize better in conjunction 
with sram_idle function and helpers.

> Even better (and already suggested in some comments on patch 8), now
> that there are board-configurable knobs, this should be set up as a very
> simple platform driver/device so boards can pass configuration in a
> standard way instead of having new APIs for use by board code to set
> configuration settings.
in this specific context, having a platform data device is more of an 
overkill - 90% of the HS platforms (just a guess based on the limited 
devices I know of and is not a hard statistics) use the TI defaults - we 
do have exceptional customers who do their own PPA - and having a 
device-driver model IMHO is an overkill for that flexibility.

-- 
Regards,
Nishanth Menon