On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 11:20 AM, Will Deacon <will.deacon@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 10:16:16AM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>> On 20/10/14 09:46, Neil Zhang wrote:
>> > Will, I prefer to check always-on field under PMU node to check
>> > whether we need Save/restore them.
>> >
>> But how do you handle it for different idle states. e.g. if CPU is in
>> retention, PMU's *might be* retained. Also I don't think PMUs will be
>> placed in "always-on" power domain like timers. So using "always-on"
>> sounds incorrect to me.
>
> Adding Mathieu to CC, since I spoke to him at LPC about this and he was
> talking about implementing proper PM domain descriptions for coresight
> components.
Good to hear that!
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert (who skipped LPC)
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
