From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: daniel.lezcano@linaro.org (Daniel Lezcano) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 16:23:20 +0200 Subject: [PATCH V4 10/20] ARM: exynos: cpuidle: Move clock setup to pm.c In-Reply-To: <5346A367.2070107@samsung.com> References: <1397123751-1957-1-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> <1397123751-1957-11-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> <5346A367.2070107@samsung.com> Message-ID: <5346A958.1030302@linaro.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 04/10/2014 03:57 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > On 10.04.2014 11:55, Daniel Lezcano wrote: >> One more step is moving the clock ratio setting at idle time in pm.c >> >> The macro names have been changed to be consistent with the other macros >> name in the file. >> >> Note, the clock divider was working only when cpuidle was enabled >> because it >> was in its init routine. With this change, the clock divider is set in >> the pm's >> init routine, so it will also operate when the cpuidle driver is not >> set, which >> is good. >> >> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano >> Reviewed-by: Viresh Kumar >> Reviewed-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz >> Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa >> --- >> arch/arm/mach-exynos/cpuidle.c | 54 >> --------------------------------------- >> arch/arm/mach-exynos/pm.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> arch/arm/mach-exynos/regs-pmu.h | 19 ++++++++++++++ >> 3 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 54 deletions(-) > > Sorry that I didn't mention that before, but now I recall that there was > already a similar patch moving this code to Exynos5250 clock driver, > which is the best place for setup of any CMU registers and a step > towards removing one more static IO mapping. Yes, Bartlomiej mentioned it. Is it possible to merge this mentioned patch or to give a pointer to it so I can integrate it into the patchset ? > Also one more thing below. > [ ... ] >> { >> #ifdef CONFIG_CACHE_L2X0 >> @@ -244,6 +276,9 @@ static void exynos_pm_resume(void) >> >> s3c_pm_do_restore_core(exynos_core_save, >> ARRAY_SIZE(exynos_core_save)); >> >> + if (soc_is_exynos5250()) >> + exynos5_core_down_clk(); >> + > > Originally this code was executed at system boot-up, but now it is > happening on resume from sleep. Is this change desired? Argh ! Sounds like I got a bad fuzz there. -- Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog