On 16:37 Mon 15 Apr , Daniel Lezcano wrote:
On 04/15/2013 04:20 PM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
On 15:29 Mon 15 Apr , Daniel Lezcano wrote:
We don't have any dependency with the SoC specific code.
Move the driver to the drivers/cpuidle directory.
Add Nicolas Ferre as author of the driver, so it will be in copy of the emails.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano daniel.lezcano@linaro.org
please use -M when generating the patch
Oh, right. Thanks for reminding me the option.
[ ... ]
+#include <linux/module.h> +#include <linux/init.h> +#include <linux/cpuidle.h> +#include <asm/cpuidle.h>
+#define AT91_MAX_STATES 2
+extern void (*at91_standby_ops)(void);
really don't like can we pass it via the pm?
I agree, it is hackish. Can you elaborate when you say "pass it via the pm" ?
I was thinking about it
I would even prefer to have a platfrom driver that pass it via platform data even in DT
but not something that can touch globally
and for drivers I prefer to do not use cpu_is only for the core
Best Regards, J.
-- http://www.linaro.org/ Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro Facebook | http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg Twitter | http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/ Blog