On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 8:22 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 07:54:32AM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: >> But the implemenation of that should not hold up this revert because >> this patch breaks *all* wakeups since the PRCM interrupt itself is >> disabled in the suspend path. > > That is not mentioned in the patch description (and it should be). > What this paragraph is saying is that this revert is most definitely > fixing a regression. > > Any "fix" which causes other breakage is not a fix, and therefore > this revert needs to go in no matter what.
The problem is that this patch(which is written by me) was merged much earlier than Rafael's patch. So I think Rafael's patch causes other breakage. > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in > the body of a message to [email protected] > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- Kyuwon (규원) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
