Hi Nishant,
On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 5:01 AM, Menon, Nishanth n...@ti.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Jean Pihet jean.pi...@newoldbits.com wrote:
[..]
--- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain-common.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain-common.c
@@ -108,3 +108,74 @@ u32
On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 2:07 AM, Jean Pihet jean.pi...@newoldbits.com wrote:
my Crib about the above apis are lack of logic power state handling :(
which forces code like cpuidle to use different apis for logic
power state and force them to use these apis just for pwrst.
Please look at the
Hi!
On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 7:29 AM, Menon, Nishanth n...@ti.com wrote:
On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 12:26 AM, Rajendra Nayak rna...@ti.com wrote:
On Friday 13 July 2012 08:31 AM, Menon, Nishanth wrote:
my Crib about the above apis are lack of logic power state handling:(
which forces code like
On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 2:18 AM, Jean Pihet jean.pi...@newoldbits.com wrote:
[..]
Santosh pointed me to the thread offline. This is indeed a much better
approach IMHO than having 3 conflicting options inside powerdomain
framework.
After looking at the code and having sent my comments, I like
On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 12:26 AM, Rajendra Nayak rna...@ti.com wrote:
On Friday 13 July 2012 08:31 AM, Menon, Nishanth wrote:
my Crib about the above apis are lack of logic power state handling:(
which forces code like cpuidle to use different apis for logic
power state and force them to use
Hi,
Here are some remarks I got after an internal review. I think those
points need to be discussed with a broader audience.
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Jean Pihet jean.pi...@newoldbits.com wrote:
Introduce functional (or logical) states for power domains and the
API functions to read the
