On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 11:14 PM, Mark A. Greer <mgreer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 03:08:54PM -0600, Paul Walmsley wrote: >> Hi >> >> On Wed, 11 Apr 2012, Jean Pihet wrote: >> >> > On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 9:05 PM, Mark A. Greer <mgreer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > > From: "Mark A. Greer" <mgreer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > > >> > > The am35x family of SoCs only support PWRDM_POWER_ON >> > > and PWRDM_POWER_INACTIVE power states. This causes >> > > an issue in some areas of the OMAP3 power-related >> > > code because of assumptions that PWRDM_POWER_RET >> > > and/or PWRDM_POWER_OFF are always valid states. >> > > >> > > To get am35x SoCs to work properly, add missing support >> > > for PWRDM_POWER_INACTIVE and remove assumptions that >> > > PWRDM_POWER_RET and PWRDM_POWER_OFF are always valid states. >> > > >> > > Signed-off-by: Mark A. Greer <mgreer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > >> > I just posted a patch set '[RFC/PATCH v2 0/6] ARM: OMAP2+: PM: >> > introduce the power domains functional states' [1] which I think >> > should be used to base your patches on. This patch set introduces >> > functional states for the power domains power ans logic states, and >> > the conversion functions between the internal power and logic states >> > and the functional states. >> > >> > I would be glad to help on the AM35x support for the functional states. >> >> Since it might take a while for the functional powerstate code to go >> upstream, if Mark wants to do this, I'd suggest that he split the >> powerdomain-specific patches off from the rest of his series. This should >> avoid blocking the rest of his patches on the infrastructure changes. > > Another good idea. I'll do the split in another day or so in case there > are more comments I can address when I respin & separate the patches. Sounds great! Regards, Jean > > Mark > -- -- 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
