Jon Hunter <jon-hunter@xxxxxx> writes: > Hi Kevin, > > On 05/30/2012 04:50 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote: > > [...] > >> I'm guessing you probably know my thoughts since you've already thought >> through how this should probably look. >> >> Basically, I don't like the result when we have to hack around missing >> runtime PM support for a driver, so IMO, the driver should be updated. >> >> IOW, it looks to me like the armpmu driver should grow runtime PM >> support. The current armpmu_release|reserve should probably be replaced >> with runtime PM get/put, and the functionality in those functions would >> be the runtime PM callbacks instead. >> >> Will, any objections to armpmu growing runtime PM support? >> >> Kevin >> >> P.S. Jon, for readability sake, any objections to moving the PMU device init >> out of devices.c into pmu.c? devices.c is awful crowded. > > No objections. I am guessing that pmu was not supported back in the ARM9 > days and so this is only really specific to omap2 devices. That being > said, should this still go into plat-omap dir or just mach-omap2? I was referring to mach-omap2/devices.c. Probably just pulling out the PMU stuff into mach-omap2/pmu.c will be enough. 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
