Hi Santosh, Tony, On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 11:06 AM, Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@xxxxxx> wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jean Pihet [mailto:jean.pihet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] >> Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2011 3:20 PM >> To: Santosh Shilimkar >> Cc: Thomas Renninger; linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Jean Pihet-XID >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf: add OMAP support for the new power events >> > [...] > >> > We need to track the actual power domain transitions as well >> > at hardware level. >> Agree >> >> > Can you please look at "pwrdm_pre_transition()" and >> > "pwrdm_post_transition()" >> > This code keep track of it using the next power state >> > and prev-power state. >> The current API only has 'trace_power_domain_target' which tracks >> the >> desired target state. >> I think we need an extra tracer 'trace_power_domain_hitstate' so >> that >> the trace parser can compare the desired ('target') and actually hit >> ('hitstate') states. >> > We use next state and previous state. 'hitstate' doesn't sound > well that's really secondary. > > Do you plan to add that additional trace then ? Yes that is idea, although adding new events in the power trace API has been proved as quite difficult to get accepted. In any case this will be done separately (iow it is not part of this patch). Also this patch also supports OMAP4 since the changes are in the generic PM frameworks. Thanks to the OMAP PM arch guys ;p Is the patch OK? If so can it be queued in the l-o tree? > > Regards, > Santosh > Regards, Jean -- 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
