Sourav Poddar <sourav.pod...@ti.com> writes:
> On Thursday 18 April 2013 11:35 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
>> Sourav Poddar<sourav.pod...@ti.com> writes:
>>
>>> Remove the "OMAP_DEVICE_NO_IDLE_ON_SUSPEND" check, since UART was the only
>>> one making
>>> use of it. Now serial core/driver takes care of the case when
>>> "no_console_suspend"
>>> is used in the bootargs and you need to keep the clock enable for console
>>> even while suspend.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Sourav Poddar<sourav.pod...@ti.com>
>> NAK. This patch will break many things...
>>
>>> ---
>>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_device.c | 7 +------
>>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_device.c
>>> b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_device.c
>>> index 381be7a..d6dce8f 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_device.c
>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_device.c
>>> @@ -620,11 +620,8 @@ static int _od_suspend_noirq(struct device *dev)
>>> ret = pm_generic_suspend_noirq(dev);
>>>
>>> if (!ret&& !pm_runtime_status_suspended(dev)) {
>>> - if (pm_generic_runtime_suspend(dev) == 0) {
>>> - if (!(od->flags& OMAP_DEVICE_NO_IDLE_ON_SUSPEND))
>>> - omap_device_idle(pdev);
>> Why did you remove the omap_device_idle() here?
> This patch is used along with patch3 to get rid of the issue. I posted
> them as a
> seperate patch beacuse of the subject line as one goes under drivers/*
> and the other
> arm/mach-omap2/*..
>
> This check was only valid for UART, and if od->flags is set to the
> "OMAP_DEVICE_NO_IDLE_ON_SUSPEND" flag, then UART will not be idled.
correct, but *every other device* would be idled (if not already idle.)
> But now, we no longer depend on od->flag value to prevent idling of
> our console UART as the prepare/complete apis will take care of them.
Right, so removing the check on od->flags is fine, but what I asked
about is why you removed the omap_device_idle() call.
Remember that this code is called for *every* omap_device during
suspend, not just UART.
What you did stops *every* device from being idled during suspend.
You didn't read my whole message. Specifically this part:
>> Note that the check is for when the flag is *not* set, so this patch
>> changes behavior for all the drivers that do not use
>> _NO_IDLE_ON_SUSPEND. I think that's the opposite of what you intended.
Kevin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
