I dont have a Lauterbach but your argument seems valid. If: +
device was in retention(CSWR) and the next state was supposed to be
OFF + the device did not hit off + by the time the code shown runs
the device is still in CSWR(say like the abe or ducati that would be
expected not to go to ON right away)
Then + there is something you'd like to know about but no event will
be generated
-evt
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 10:10 AM, eric van tassell <evttxl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I dont have a Lauterbach but your argument seems valid. If:
>
> + device was in retention(CSWR) and the next state was supposed to be OFF
> + the device did not hit off
> + by the time the code shown runs the device is still in CSWR(say like the abe or ducati that would be expected not to go to ON right away)
>
> Then
>
> there is something you'd like to know about but no event will be generated
>
> -evt
>
> On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 4:08 AM, Paul Walmsley <paul@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi Jean
>>
>> Quick question on the tracing in _pwrdm_state_switch().
>>
>> That section of the code reads:
>>
>> state = pwrdm_read_pwrst(pwrdm);
>>
>> ...
>>
>> case PWRDM_STATE_PREV:
>> prev = pwrdm_read_prev_pwrst(pwrdm);
>> if (pwrdm->state != prev)
>> pwrdm->state_counter[prev]++;
>> if (prev == PWRDM_POWER_RET)
>> _update_logic_membank_counters(pwrdm);
>> /*
>> * If the power domain did not hit the desired state,
>> * generate a trace event with both the desired and hit states
>> */
>> if (state != prev) {
>> trace_state = (PWRDM_TRACE_STATES_FLAG |
>> ((state & OMAP_POWERSTATE_MASK) << 8) |
>> ((prev & OMAP_POWERSTATE_MASK) << 0));
>> trace_power_domain_target(pwrdm->name, trace_state,
>> smp_processor_id());
>> }
>>
>> This code is called after returning from WFI. It appears to compare the
>> powerdomain's current power state ('state') with the powerdomain's
>> previous power state ('prev'). But it appears to me that it should
>> instead compare the powerdomain's intended power state ('pwrdm->state')
>> with 'prev' ? The rationale is that the PRCM could have brought that
>> powerdomain up to a higher power state than 'pwrdm->state' during the
>> wakeup process.
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>>
>> - Paul
>> --
>> 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
>
>
>
>
> --
> - evt
> (Eric van Tassell)
> twitter: evt_texelsoft
> linked-in: linkedin.com/in/evttxl
--
- evt
(Eric van Tassell)
twitter: evt_texelsoft
linked-in: linkedin.com/in/evttxl
--
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
