[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1505251854380.5457@nanos>
Date: Mon, 25 May 2015 18:56:58 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>
cc: Sylvain Rochet <sylvain.rochet@...secur.com>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>,
Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>,
Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clockevents: don't suspend/resume if unused
On Fri, 16 Jan 2015, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 16/01/2015 at 10:20:14 +0100, Sylvain Rochet wrote :
> > > + if (dev->suspend && dev->mode != CLOCK_EVT_MODE_UNUSED)
> >
> > I wonder if we should use > CLOCK_EVT_MODE_SHUTDOWN
> > (or CLOCK_EVT_MODE_UNUSED || CLOCK_EVT_MODE_SHUTDOWN) instead of
> > !CLOCK_EVT_MODE_UNUSED.
> >
>
> I'll let Thomas or Daniel decide :) But I'm open to that.
I'm unsure about the shutdown part. shutdown can be an intermediate
state where its not a given, that the clocks are disabled. I pick it
up as is.
Thanks,
tglx
--
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