$subject and patch don't match. On Thursday 08 August 2013 08:26 AM, Nishanth Menon wrote: > On 08/08/2013 03:45 AM, Russ Dill wrote: >> In reference to >> the M3 handling it, the M3 wouldn't know which devices have a driver >> bound and which don't. > Does it need to? M3 firmware can pretty much define "I will force the device > into low power state, and if the drivers dont handle things properly, fix the > darned driver". M3 behavior should be considered as a "hardware" as far as > Linux running on MPU is concerned, and firmware helps change the behavior by > accounting for SoC quirks. *if* we have ability to handle this in the > firmware, there is no need to carry this in Linux. > I agree with Nishant. I don't like this patch and IIRC, I gave same comment in the last version. Linux need not know about all such firmware quirks. Also all these M3 specific stuff, should be done somewhere else. Probably having a small M3 driver won't be a bad idea.
Regards, Santosh -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
