[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120801140121.GB19957@avionic-0098.adnet.avionic-design.de>
Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2012 16:01:21 +0200
From: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...onic-design.de>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc: Alex Courbot <acourbot@...dia.com>,
Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>,
Simon Glass <sjg@...omium.org>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
"linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org"
<devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH v3 1/3] runtime interpreted power sequences
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 02:55:31PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 03:38:14PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 02:26:51PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > This is why __devinit data will only be discarded when this is not
> > > possible.
>
> > That's exactly my point. But I seem to have miserably failed to get that
> > across. =)
>
> We must be talking at cross purposes then. What I'm saying is that the
> framework shouldn't rely on platform data and should assume that the
> kernel might be configured so it can be discarded (by copying most
> likely).
Yes. I think this should be solved by the power_seq_build() function
which uses the platform data description of the sequence and builds it
into something for internal use that doesn't rely on anything in the
platform data.
Thierry
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists