Re: OMAP4 errata i740

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Archit Taneja <a0393947@xxxxxx> wrote:
> On Friday 30 March 2012 03:59 PM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
>>
>> On Friday 30 March 2012 03:53 PM, Cousson, Benoit wrote:
>>>
>>> On 3/30/2012 10:44 AM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Friday 30 March 2012 02:04 PM, Archit Taneja wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Friday 30 March 2012 02:01 PM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> + Kevin
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Friday 30 March 2012 01:56 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, 2012-03-30 at 13:51 +0530, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Tomi
>>>>>>>> Valkeinen<tomi.valkeinen@xxxxxx>    wrote:
>>>>>>>
>
[...]

>
> I had a general PRCM question regarding this. If an initiator is disabled
> (i.e, clocks are OFF and Power state is OFF), then would the PRCM even care
> to look at the IdleAck/Mstandby signal of that initiator? Or in other words,
> look at what the initiator had programmed in it's SYSCONFIG register. If it
> does consider them, it seems like that's bad HW design!
>
If a PD 9powerdomain) is already in OFF state, that means all the initiators in
that PD already has standby asserted. The modules in that
PD also have transitioned.

So PRCM won't poke that PD initiators/modules because it has
already have a green signal for power transitions. At least that is
what my understanding from the OMAP PRCM specs.

Regards
Santosh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Arm (vger)]     [ARM Kernel]     [ARM MSM]     [Linux Tegra]     [Linux WPAN Networking]     [Linux Wireless Networking]     [Maemo Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Trails]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux