On Fri, 16 Dec 2011, Rajendra Nayak wrote: > On Friday 16 December 2011 04:53 PM, Paul Walmsley wrote: > > On Fri, 16 Dec 2011, Paul Walmsley wrote: > > > > > + * XXX Will not work correctly if the RM_*_CONTEXT register > > > + * offset is 0 -- probably a flag should be used to avoid this > > > + * situation, rather than testing @oh->prcm.omap4.context_offs. No > > > + * return value. > > > > By the way, I'm also worried about this case. Am wondering if we should > > add a flag here just to be sure, rather than testing the offset. > > Thoughts? > > I am not sure if we even have any modules on OMAP4 which *do not* > support module level context loss status and for which we need to fall > back on pwrdm level status. So maybe we could even get rid of the check > for a valid context_offset altogether and expect it to be populated for > all modules as we do with the clkctrl offset.
Okay, we'll probably want to double-check that in the data and make sure it's true. We should probably wait on this one until someone has a chance to check that out, I guess during the 3.4 time frame? - Paul -- 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
