Re: [PATCH 1/1] OMAP3: PM: Fix compilation issue of omap3_pm_init_opp_table

[Romit Dasgupta <romit@ti.com>]

Menon, Nishanth wrote:
> Romit Dasgupta had written, on 01/19/2010 08:09 AM, the following:
>>>>>   
>>>> Err... NAK.. I think you missed 
>>>> http://marc.info/?t=126356119700001&r=1&w=2 ?
>>>> there seems to be an issue else where, I have not dug at it yet..
>>> Yeah. OK, I couldn't see the logs as the dumps has been removed already from that thread.
>>> But if I got the problem correctly, the problem is when CONFIG_PM is not set but cpu freq is.
>>> And if there is any call to new omap opp layer helper functions, then it will BUG the system.
>>> Causing hangs.
>>>
>>> I guess one way to solve this is to bind compilation of omap opp layer to CONFIG_PM and CONFIG_CPU_FREQ.
>>> If either is disabled, then omap opp layer must be nops.
>>>
>>> What do you think?
>>>
>>> I am sending a patch to do the above.
>> No. That is incorrect. CONFIG_CPU_FREQ, CONFIG_CPU_IDLE and CONFIG_PM are
>> independent. None of the features should be dependent on the other two!
>> -Romit
> OPP layer is required by CPU_FREQ & CONFIG_PM, not CPU_IDLE.
> 
> if we modify Eduardo's patch from:
> 
> if defined(CONFIG_PM) && defined(CONFIG_CPU_FREQ)
> To
> 
> if defined(CONFIG_PM) || defined(CONFIG_CPU_FREQ)
> 
> wont that ensure the independence is maintained for OPP layer? then, 
> probably pm34xx.c maynot be the right place for opp registration for 
> 3430 opps, and we should move it to opp34xx.c(I hate having new files :( )..
> 
It should be only
#ifdef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ. OPP has nothing to do with CONFIG_PM.

Why do you need CPU_FREQ for suspend/resume??