On 11/07/2013 04:18 PM, Nishanth Menon wrote: > Tested this on a vendor V3.12 tag based kernel: > > Test patch: http://pastebin.com/AmnktQ7B > test: echo -n "1">/sys/power/pm_print_times; rtcwake -d /dev/rtc0 -m > mem -s 5 > > > with the current patch: http://pastebin.com/RujarRLV > suspend_late and resume_early: http://pastebin.com/RujarRLV These two are identical. > suspend_noirq and resume_noirq: http://pastebin.com/nKfbm7Mj And I can't see any difference between this one and the first one, except for slightly different timings. Am I missing anything? > one needs to be careful of the sequence - donot forget that > omap_device also does stuff in the background to every SoC device in > noirq - sequence is paramount. you would want to ensure edma is saving > after every single dependent device is done with it's stuff and > guarenteed to never request any further transaction, and resume is > done before any of the dependent devices need edma. but edma is also a > peripheral that omap_device and generic runtime pm framework deals > with - so ensure sequences consider that as well. So, what would you say which sequence is correct then? :) Thanks, Daniel -- 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
