* Benoit Cousson <b-cousson@xxxxxx> [110927 09:45]:
> Most devices are using the same default omap_device_pm_latency structure
> during device built. In order to avoid the duplication of the same
> structure everywhere, add a default structure that will be used if
> the device does not have an explicit one.
>
> Next patches will clean the duplicated structures.
>
> Signed-off-by: Benoit Cousson <b-cousson@xxxxxx>
> Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@xxxxxx>
> Cc: Paul Walmsley <paul@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/arm/plat-omap/omap_device.c | 19 ++++++++++++++++++-
> 1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-omap/omap_device.c b/arch/arm/plat-omap/omap_device.c
> index f832f92..cd8d977 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/plat-omap/omap_device.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/plat-omap/omap_device.c
> @@ -97,6 +97,14 @@
> static int omap_device_register(struct platform_device *pdev);
> static int omap_early_device_register(struct platform_device *pdev);
>
> +static struct omap_device_pm_latency omap_default_latency[] = {
> + {
> + .deactivate_func = omap_device_idle_hwmods,
> + .activate_func = omap_device_enable_hwmods,
> + .flags = OMAP_DEVICE_LATENCY_AUTO_ADJUST,
> + }
> +};
> +
> /* Private functions */
Isn't this racey between devices if the latency values get adjusted
automatically for each device?
Tony
--
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
