Paul Walmsley <paul@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Hi Kevin, > > On Fri, 8 Jan 2010, Kevin Hilman wrote: > >> Some HW blocks have errata which requires selective enabling/disabling >> of SYSCONFIG bits. In particular, some blocks have known issues with >> smart-idle so smart-idle has to be disabled under certain conditions. > > ... > >> RFC: would an API to only touch smart-idle be more appropriate? Maybe >> omap_hwmod_smart_idle_enable(oh, bool enable)? > > This idea sounds good. Since the SYSCONFIG bit fields can change and move > around depending on the chip and IP, some type of higher-level API seems > necessary to preserve sanity. > > Maybe omap_hwmod_smart_idle_enable() and omap_hwmod_smart_idle_disable(), > mimicking API styles like clk_enable()/clk_disable(), etc.? Care to spin > something like that? Sounds good, Coming right up.... Kevin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
