"Menon, Nishanth" <nm@xxxxxx> writes: > On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 3:52 AM, Shilimkar, Santosh > <santosh.shilimkar@xxxxxx> wrote: >> On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Shilimkar, Santosh >> <santosh.shilimkar@xxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 4:12 AM, Kevin Hilman <khilman@xxxxxx> wrote: >>>> Tero Kristo <t-kristo@xxxxxx> writes: >>>> > [...] >>>> - Rather than hooking into omap4_enter_lowpower(), should use >>>> the cluster PM enter/exit notifier chain. >>>> >>> This is again specific to device OFF only and not related to CPU >>> cluster state as such. So I don't think notifiers should be used here. >>> >>> O.w even when we attempt just MPU OSWR C-state, all these functions will >>> get called in notifier chain. >>> >> Just a thought, we can have a separate notifier chain for device OFF. It can >> allow use to get rid of 'enable_off_mode" kind of flags and can be >> used by many drivers too. > > Like the overall idea, but one minor dumb concern might be sequencing > of notifiers > - OFF entry and restore needs things to be executed in a specific sequence. > How do we plan to ensure the sequence is maintained in a notifier call > chain? one > possible option might be a "priority" based scheme? Or just combine the events that need a specific sequence into single notifier callback function. Kevin -- 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
