From: Kevin Hilman <khilman@deeprootsystems.com>
To: "Nayak, Rajendra" <rnayak@ti.com>
Cc: Kalle Jokiniemi <kalle.jokiniemi@digia.com>,
"linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
"Derrick, David" <dderrick@ti.com>,
"Woodruff, Richard" <r-woodruff2@ti.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/04] OMAP3: PM: Disable PER DPLL idle before OFF, reduces OFF latency by 20ms
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:24:28 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87bpo55pib.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5A47E75E594F054BAF48C5E4FC4B92AB0305B77F0D@dbde02.ent.ti.com> (Rajendra Nayak's message of "Tue\, 30 Jun 2009 11\:28\:18 +0530")
"Nayak, Rajendra" <rnayak@ti.com> writes:
[...]
>>>
>>> Oh.. it turns out that when the scratchpad save routine is called,
>>> the autoidle for PER is not even set. Its only set some place
>>> later. So the 20ms or so advantage was always there on l-o pm
>>> branch even without this patch :)
>>>
>>
>>So for the benefit of the archives...
>>
>>I'm dropping this patch since the equivalent is alrady in PM branch.
>
> Today the sequence is such that the PER dpll autoidle is set only
> after the first scratchpad save (so this patch has no
> affect). Sometime in future, if with some change in function
> sequencing we end up enabling the PER dpll autoidle early on, we
> might have an additional 20ms or so OFF latency without anyone
> really noticing. Would'nt it be good to just have this patch to
> take care of any sequencing changes later?
Yes, I think you're right. This change could indeed prevent some
future problmes down the road. I'll merge it.
Thanks,
Kevin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-30 22:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1245224794.6847.141.camel@ubuntu>
2009-06-17 9:50 ` [PATCH 01/04] OMAP3: PM: Disable PER DPLL idle before OFF, reduces OFF latency by 20ms Nayak, Rajendra
2009-06-17 10:26 ` Kalle Jokiniemi
2009-06-17 12:38 ` Nayak, Rajendra
2009-06-17 12:47 ` Kalle Jokiniemi
2009-06-17 13:01 ` Nayak, Rajendra
2009-06-29 18:58 ` Kevin Hilman
2009-06-30 5:58 ` Nayak, Rajendra
2009-06-30 22:24 ` Kevin Hilman [this message]
2009-06-30 22:32 ` Paul Walmsley
2009-07-01 5:39 ` Nayak, Rajendra
[not found] ` <87zlbov64k.fsf@deeprootsystems.com>
2009-07-01 14:28 ` Woodruff, Richard
2009-07-01 14:36 ` Kevin Hilman
2009-06-16 11:52 Rajendra Nayak
2009-06-16 12:52 ` Högander Jouni
2009-06-16 13:17 ` Nayak, Rajendra
2009-06-16 14:21 ` Kevin Hilman
2009-06-16 16:09 ` Derrick, David
2009-06-17 8:33 ` Paul Walmsley
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87bpo55pib.fsf@deeprootsystems.com \
--to=khilman@deeprootsystems.com \
--cc=dderrick@ti.com \
--cc=kalle.jokiniemi@digia.com \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=r-woodruff2@ti.com \
--cc=rnayak@ti.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox