[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1295979242.10109.308.camel@e102109-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 18:14:02 +0000
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Cc: Colin Cross <ccross@...roid.com>, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, olof@...om.net,
konkers@...roid.com, Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@...com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...ricsson.com>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/28] ARM: mm: cache-l2x0: Add support for
re-enabling l2x0
On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 15:41 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> I think we need to come up with some proper way to deal with cpuidle
> which doesn't involve adding lots of globally visible functions to all
> sorts of bits of code and having platforms call them individually,
> otherwise this is going to get _really_ messy in the future.
>
> Maybe we need a notifier list which can be told when cpuidle events
> happen, so that parts of the system such as VFP and L2 cache support
> can do the right thing without having platforms add lots of stuff like
>
> gic_secondary_init();
> gic_restore_interrupt_types();
> vfp_enable();
> l2x0_enable();
> twd_enable();
> ... etc ...
>
> in their SoC specific code.
But do we need a strict order between such operations? The notifier call
chain isn't too flexible.
--
Catalin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists