Kevin,
> -Original Message-
> From: Kevin Hilman [mailto:khil...@deeprootsystems.com]
> Sent: Saturday, September 25, 2010 1:28 AM
> To: Sripathy, Vishwanath
> Cc: linux-o...@vger.kernel.org; linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] OMAP3 PM: move
org; Kevin Hillman
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] OMAP3 PM: move omap3 sleep to ddr
>
> * Tony Lindgren [100924 11:53]:
> > * Vishwanath BS [100924 03:50]:
> > > There is no need to keep omap3 sleep code in SRAM. This code can be
> run very
> > > well on DDR. This woul
* Vishwanath BS [100924 03:50]:
> There is no need to keep omap3 sleep code in SRAM. This code can be run very
> well on DDR. This would help us to instrument CPUIdle latencies.
Uhh, are you sure about this? To me it sounds like you're then
relying on the code running from the cache for off-idle?
* Tony Lindgren [100924 11:53]:
> * Vishwanath BS [100924 03:50]:
> > There is no need to keep omap3 sleep code in SRAM. This code can be run very
> > well on DDR. This would help us to instrument CPUIdle latencies.
>
> Uhh, are you sure about this? To me it sounds like you're then
> relying on
Vishwanath BS writes:
> There is no need to keep omap3 sleep code in SRAM.
> This code can be run very well on DDR.
/me remains skeptical
> This would help us to instrument CPUIdle latencies.
Indeed, but...
I'm afraid we will need a much more descriptive changelog here,
describing in detail
There is no need to keep omap3 sleep code in SRAM. This code can be run very
well on DDR. This would help us to instrument CPUIdle latencies.
Tested on ZOOM3.
Signed-off-by: Vishwanath BS
Cc: Kevin Hillman
Cc: linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
---
arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm34xx.c |9 +
1 fi
From: Vishwanath BS
There is no need to keep omap3 sleep code in SRAM. This code can be run very
well on DDR. This would help us to instrument CPUIdle latencies.
Tested on ZOOM3.
Signed-off-by: Vishwanath BS
---
arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm34xx.c |9 +
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+),
