On Tuesday 26 February 2008, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote: > > Another way to address that rm9200 issue would be to just rate > > the TC clockevent source lower than the one based on the system > > timer, so it's set up but never enabled ... and remember "t2_clk", > > calling clk_enable() only when that clockevent device is active. > > > > That would address one half of the suspend/resume equation too, > > ensuring that clock is disabled during suspend... > > Yes, we could probably do that. Which means we can just remove all the > ifdeffery?
There'd still be the #ifdef for CONFIG_GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS, unless all the platforms get updated to support that. Right now it's a "patches available but not merged" situation. > > The other half being: how to clk_disable(t0_clk) during system > > suspend? (And t1_clk on some systems.) There's currently no > > clocksource.set_mode() call; evidently there's an assumption that > > such counters cost no power, so they can always be left running. > > Yes...that would be a clocksource core issue I guess. Better leave that > for later... My thoughts exactly. ;) Plus a bit of puzzlement why that didn't trigger at least a warning during AT91 suspend testing. There used to be warnings there about clocks which were wrongly left enabled... - Dave -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/