All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com>
To: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>
Cc: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	khilman@ti.com, paul@pwsan.com, b-cousson@ti.com,
	Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@ti.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] OMAP: powerdomains: Make all powerdomain target states as ON at init
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 11:03:16 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110715080315.GC2611@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1310527588-13022-1-git-send-email-santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1843 bytes --]

Hi,

On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 08:56:27AM +0530, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
> From: Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@ti.com>
> 
> Program all powerdomain target state as ON; This is to
> prevent domains from hitting low power states (if bootloader
> has target states set to something other than ON) and potentially
> even losing context while PM is not fully initilized.
> The PM late init code can then program the desired target
> state for all the power domains.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@ti.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.c |   12 +++++++++++-
>  1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.c
> index e0490bc..e61866c 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.c
> @@ -109,6 +109,16 @@ static int _pwrdm_register(struct powerdomain *pwrdm)
>  
>  	list_add(&pwrdm->node, &pwrdm_list);
>  
> +	/*
> +	* Program all powerdomain target state as ON; This is to
> +	* prevent domains from hitting low power states (if bootloader
> +	* has target states set to something other than ON) and potentially
> +	* even losing context while PM is not fully initilized.
> +	* The PM late init code can then program the desired target
> +	* state for all the power domains.
> +	*/
> +	pwrdm_set_next_pwrst(pwrdm, PWRDM_POWER_ON);

Just out of curiosity, I was wondering if it really makes sense to power
up all power domains during boot just to avoid loosing context. Doesn't
hwmod/omap_device soft-reset all IPs during initialization ? If that's
really the case, shouldn't we then choose which powerdomains are
strictly necessary for boot and only power those up ?

Sorry if this is a non-sensical question, but I was curious about it
;-)

-- 
balbi

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: balbi@ti.com (Felipe Balbi)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] OMAP: powerdomains: Make all powerdomain target states as ON at init
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 11:03:16 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110715080315.GC2611@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1310527588-13022-1-git-send-email-santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>

Hi,

On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 08:56:27AM +0530, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
> From: Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@ti.com>
> 
> Program all powerdomain target state as ON; This is to
> prevent domains from hitting low power states (if bootloader
> has target states set to something other than ON) and potentially
> even losing context while PM is not fully initilized.
> The PM late init code can then program the desired target
> state for all the power domains.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@ti.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.c |   12 +++++++++++-
>  1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.c
> index e0490bc..e61866c 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.c
> @@ -109,6 +109,16 @@ static int _pwrdm_register(struct powerdomain *pwrdm)
>  
>  	list_add(&pwrdm->node, &pwrdm_list);
>  
> +	/*
> +	* Program all powerdomain target state as ON; This is to
> +	* prevent domains from hitting low power states (if bootloader
> +	* has target states set to something other than ON) and potentially
> +	* even losing context while PM is not fully initilized.
> +	* The PM late init code can then program the desired target
> +	* state for all the power domains.
> +	*/
> +	pwrdm_set_next_pwrst(pwrdm, PWRDM_POWER_ON);

Just out of curiosity, I was wondering if it really makes sense to power
up all power domains during boot just to avoid loosing context. Doesn't
hwmod/omap_device soft-reset all IPs during initialization ? If that's
really the case, shouldn't we then choose which powerdomains are
strictly necessary for boot and only power those up ?

Sorry if this is a non-sensical question, but I was curious about it
;-)

-- 
balbi
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20110715/e9cd6215/attachment.sig>

  parent reply	other threads:[~2011-07-15  8:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-07-13  3:26 [PATCH] OMAP: powerdomains: Make all powerdomain target states as ON at init Santosh Shilimkar
2011-07-13  3:26 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-07-13  3:26 ` [PATCH] OMAP: clockdomain: Wait for powerdomain to be ON when using clockdomain force wakeup Santosh Shilimkar
2011-07-13  3:26   ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-07-15  8:03   ` Paul Walmsley
2011-07-15  8:03     ` Paul Walmsley
2011-07-16  7:48     ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-07-16  7:48       ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-08-11 14:07       ` Santosh
2011-08-11 14:07         ` Santosh
2011-08-12 14:27         ` Paul Walmsley
2011-08-12 14:27           ` Paul Walmsley
2011-08-17  1:47           ` Paul Walmsley
2011-08-17  1:47             ` Paul Walmsley
2011-08-17  5:11             ` Santosh
2011-08-17  5:11               ` Santosh
2011-07-15  7:54 ` [PATCH] OMAP: powerdomains: Make all powerdomain target states as ON at init Paul Walmsley
2011-07-15  7:54   ` Paul Walmsley
2011-07-16  7:28   ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-07-16  7:28     ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-08-17  1:50     ` Paul Walmsley
2011-08-17  1:50       ` Paul Walmsley
2011-07-15  8:03 ` Felipe Balbi [this message]
2011-07-15  8:03   ` Felipe Balbi
2011-07-15  8:10   ` Paul Walmsley
2011-07-15  8:10     ` Paul Walmsley
2011-07-15  8:17     ` Felipe Balbi
2011-07-15  8:17       ` Felipe Balbi
2011-07-15  8:23       ` Paul Walmsley
2011-07-15  8:23         ` Paul Walmsley
2011-07-15  8:37         ` Felipe Balbi
2011-07-15  8:37           ` Felipe Balbi
2011-08-17  1:56           ` Paul Walmsley
2011-08-17  1:56             ` Paul Walmsley

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20110715080315.GC2611@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com \
    --to=balbi@ti.com \
    --cc=b-cousson@ti.com \
    --cc=khilman@ti.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paul@pwsan.com \
    --cc=rnayak@ti.com \
    --cc=santosh.shilimkar@ti.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.