[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20161206180421.GA20480@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 19:04:21 +0100
From: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
To: Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Mugunthan V N <mugunthanvnm@...com>,
Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@...com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
Murali Karicheri <m-karicheri2@...com>,
Wingman Kwok <w-kwok2@...com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 09/13] net: ethernet: ti: cpts: rework
initialization/deinitialization
On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 11:49:14AM -0600, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
> But we do reset whole cpsw :( and that's required to support PM use cases as
> suspend/resume.
The code is resetting the clock unconditionally on ifup/down. That
sucks. If you reset the clock *only* after resume, that would be ok.
> There are also PM requirement to shutdown cpsw in case all interfaces are down.
Well, those requirements are not too smart. As an end user, I expect
that ifdown/up does not change the time. There isn't any reason to
reset the clock in this case.
> More over, there are requirement to minimize cpsw power consumption in case all links are
> disconnected (and cpts is special case here).
>
> So, at least resetting of the timecounter still required.
Only if you follow that poorly conceived PM plan. Anyhow, I agree
that it isn't the task of your present series to fix that.
> Ok. I'll try to optimize it following your directions.
What I would like to see is: initialize the cyclecounter fields
exactly once.
Thanks,
Richard
Powered by blists - more mailing lists