On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Archit Taneja <a0393947@xxxxxx> wrote: > On Friday 30 March 2012 03:59 PM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: >> >> On Friday 30 March 2012 03:53 PM, Cousson, Benoit wrote: >>> >>> On 3/30/2012 10:44 AM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: >>>> >>>> On Friday 30 March 2012 02:04 PM, Archit Taneja wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Friday 30 March 2012 02:01 PM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> + Kevin >>>>>> >>>>>> On Friday 30 March 2012 01:56 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, 2012-03-30 at 13:51 +0530, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Tomi >>>>>>>> Valkeinen<tomi.valkeinen@xxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>>> > [...] > > I had a general PRCM question regarding this. If an initiator is disabled > (i.e, clocks are OFF and Power state is OFF), then would the PRCM even care > to look at the IdleAck/Mstandby signal of that initiator? Or in other words, > look at what the initiator had programmed in it's SYSCONFIG register. If it > does consider them, it seems like that's bad HW design! > If a PD 9powerdomain) is already in OFF state, that means all the initiators in that PD already has standby asserted. The modules in that PD also have transitioned. So PRCM won't poke that PD initiators/modules because it has already have a green signal for power transitions. At least that is what my understanding from the OMAP PRCM specs. Regards Santosh -- 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
