Hi,
On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 12:20:40PM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> >> + if ((od->flags & OMAP_DEVICE_SUSPENDED) &&
> >> + (od->_state == OMAP_DEVICE_STATE_IDLE))
> >> + omap_device_enable(pdev);
> >> +
> >> + return pm_generic_resume(dev);
> >> +}
> >> +
> >> static struct dev_power_domain omap_device_power_domain = {
> >> .ops = {
> >> .runtime_suspend = _od_runtime_suspend,
> >> .runtime_idle = _od_runtime_idle,
> >> .runtime_resume = _od_runtime_resume,
> >> USE_PLATFORM_PM_SLEEP_OPS
> >> + .suspend = _od_suspend,
> >> + .resume = _od_resume,
> >> }
> >> };
> >
> > it all depends on when are you planning to get this patch upstream. I'm
> > considering getting some PM working on USB host and remove the
> > pm_runtime calls from system suspend/resume either during -rc or next
> > merge window.
>
> Well, IMO it's way too late for this kind of change for -rc, so I'm
> considering it for the upcoming merge window.
yes, that's true. Who should take the hwmod patches btw ? I'm still
wondering if we should patch hwmod data first and push the _correct_ PM
part on 3.2.
--
balbi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
