From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kevin Hilman Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 4/8] ARM: OMAP3: add manual control for mpu / core pwrdm usecounting Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2012 14:48:29 -0700 Message-ID: <87y5kljyhe.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> References: <1342189185-5306-1-git-send-email-t-kristo@ti.com> <1342189185-5306-5-git-send-email-t-kristo@ti.com> <878ve5j8se.fsf@ti.com> <1343637607.9847.13.camel@sokoban> <1347010239.10702.94.camel@sokoban> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-pb0-f46.google.com ([209.85.160.46]:43398 "EHLO mail-pb0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751309Ab2IGVsb (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Sep 2012 17:48:31 -0400 Received: by pbbrr13 with SMTP id rr13so209902pbb.19 for ; Fri, 07 Sep 2012 14:48:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1347010239.10702.94.camel@sokoban> (Tero Kristo's message of "Fri, 7 Sep 2012 12:30:39 +0300") Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: t-kristo@ti.com Cc: Jean Pihet , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, paul@pwsan.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Tero Kristo writes: > On Mon, 2012-08-06 at 12:14 +0200, Jean Pihet wrote: >> Hi Tero, >> >> On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 10:40 AM, Tero Kristo wrote: >> > On Fri, 2012-07-27 at 12:36 -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: >> >> Tero Kristo writes: >> >> >> >> > mpu / core powerdomain usecounts are now statically increased >> >> > by 1 during MPU activity. This allows the domains to reflect >> >> > actual usage, and will allow the usecount to reach 0 just before >> >> > all CPUs are ready to idle. Proper powerdomain usecounts are >> >> > propageted to voltagedomain level also, and will allow vc >> >> > callbacks to be triggered at right point of time. >> >> > >> >> > Signed-off-by: Tero Kristo >> >> > Cc: Paul Walmsley >> >> > Cc: Kevin Hilman >> >> >> >> IMO, the idea is fine, but I'm not crazy about the implementation in >> >> powerdomain.c, which is meant for pwrdm generic code. In particular, >> >> I'm not crazy about the pwrdm lookups in powerdomain.c. >> >> >> >> Since pm.c already has references to mpu_pwrdm and core_pwrdm, why >> >> not just add the pwrdm_clkdm_enable/disable calls directly in pm.c >> > >> > I think this was how the patch was in some earlier rev but I thought I'd >> > try to be more clever with this. :) I can revert the implementation back >> > to this. >> Furthermore after the changes in pre/post transitions [1], some more >> checks will be needed to identify the transitions on the mpu and core >> power domains. >> >> [1] http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git;a=commitdiff;h=e055548953355b6e69c56f9e54388845b29b4e97 >> >> Regards, >> Jean > > Hi Kevin, > > What is the latest status regarding this one, seeing the patch mentioned > got reverted due to problems? Should I do some changes for this or not? No, using latest minline should be fine. > I can look at moving the code away from the generic powerdomain.c at > least, but is there anything else? Nothing else I can think of (but my vacation has purged my brain of most of the details here, so I may be forgetting something.) Kevin