On Mon, 2011-06-13 at 11:37 -0500, Ghongdemath, Girish wrote:
> Tomi,
> Couple of queries,
>
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 4:51 AM, Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@xxxxxx> wrote:
> > Paul, can you take this patch and queue it for an rc?
> >
> > Tomi
> >
> > On Thu, 2011-06-09 at 16:56 +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> >> get_context_loss_count functions return context loss count as u32, and
> >> zero means an error. However, zero is also returned when context has
> >> never been lost and could also be returned when the context loss count
> >> has wrapped and goes to zero.
> >>
> >> Change the functions to return an int, with negative value meaning an
> >> error.
> >>
>
> >> + if (off_mode_enabled) {
>
> - why have a check for off_mode_enabled? As this only detects valid
> next state for MPU/CORE. Other pwrdm can still
> hit OFF.
It does what the code did previously, without changing the logic. And
this doesn't detect anything, it's just an dummy emulation for context
loss to test the drivers.
> >> + count++;
> >> + /*
> >> + * Context loss count has to be a non-negative value.
> >> + * Clear the sign bit to get a value range from 0 to
> >> + * INT_MAX.
> >> + */
> >> + count &= INT_MAX;
> >> + dummy_context_loss_counter = count;
> >> + }
> >> }
>
> - Why not use u32 instead?
So that we can return error values. That was the whole point of this
patch.
Tomi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fbdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
