[lkml]   [2012]   [Apr]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH/RFC v2] ARM: amba: Remove AMBA level regulator support
    On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 11:27 PM, Mark Brown
    <> wrote:
    > On Sun, Apr 01, 2012 at 09:22:50PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
    >> Combined with the PL022 patch this causes a power regression since
    >> the PL022 is hereafter always on.
    > I guess this code isn't in mainline, though?  In that case you can
    > always add a revert of this commit to your out of tree patches if you
    > need to.

    No, we can sure live with it... Out-of-mainline we do use power domains
    so that's what we should do instead. It currently looks like this:;a=blob;f=arch/arm/mach-ux500/pm/runtime.c;hb=HEAD

    It's a really nice piece of code but uses some out-of-tree features,
    the most obvious one is "atomic regulators" (which are exactly

    >> But to the defence: power domain code was not in the kernel
    >> when the AMBA "vcore" regulator was introduced so how else
    >> could we do it... except for inventing power domains...
    > Which might've happened sooner if we'd noticed :)  There were some other
    > platforms doing similar things but they mostly used the clock API since
    > it was always entirely platform code until 3.4 so they're less intrusive
    > into the generic code.

    Yeah ... but this sounds familiar, (searching searching) Yes! We did ask on
    the lists if regulators were proper for modeling power domains in 2008:

    But I should've pushed for a proper answer ...

    Linus Walleij
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2012-04-02 00:35    [W:0.024 / U:0.156 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site