From: b-cousson@ti.com (Cousson, Benoit) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 19:25:26 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 05/21] Revert "OMAP3+: PM: SR: add suspend/resume handlers" In-Reply-To: References: <1327504583-13408-1-git-send-email-j-pihet@ti.com> <1327504583-13408-6-git-send-email-j-pihet@ti.com> <4F2041B1.6060907@ti.com> Message-ID: <4F204916.7050504@ti.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 1/25/2012 7:13 PM, Jean Pihet wrote: > Hi Benoit, > > On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 6:53 PM, Cousson, Benoit wrote: >> Salut Jean, >> >> >> On 1/25/2012 4:16 PM, Jean Pihet wrote: >>> >>> From: Nishanth Menon >>> >>> This reverts commit b6be18f0bab68ed304ebbb2d787d1c36237eda62. >> >> That weird, because you revert a patch you introduced just before: >> [PATCH 03/21] OMAP3+: PM: SR: add suspend/resume handlers > I left the 2 commits on purpose because I think the descriptions give a good > description on why the commits have been introduced and then later removed. > >> >> Moreover this commit id is not relevant since it is probably only in >> Nishanth's GIT tree. > I removed this in the next version. > >> >> >>> Revert the patch so that we remove any opportunity of SR disable/enable >>> and any device_scale transitions from conflicting with suspend/resume >>> path by moving the sr enable/disable activity to the very last >>> stage(in pmxx.C). The previous patch tried to optimize suspend resume >>> time, but since device_scale opportunities are from multiple drivers >>> (other than cpufreq), hence reverting back to original approach >>> >>> Conflicts: >>> >>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/smartreflex.c >>> >>> Change-Id: I236b0e8259cfb371899dd0c93875739a21358e33 > Removed as well. Sorry about that. > >> >> And this looks like gerrit leftover that should not be there. >> >> I guess that path #3 and #5 should just be removed. > I am ok with both options (keeping or removing the 2 commits), please > let me know what you prefer. I guess that removing both is the only acceptable solution anyway. That might force you to change a little bit the #4, but maybe it not even needed. Regards, Benoit