[PATCH 3/5] ARM: twd: Add context save restore support

-----Original Message-----
From: Russell King - ARM Linux [mailto:linux at arm.linux.org.uk]
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 9:43 PM
To: Santosh Shilimkar
Cc: Thomas Gleixner; Colin Cross; catalin.marinas at arm.com;
linus.ml.walleij at gmail.com; linux-omap at vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-
kernel at lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] ARM: twd: Add context save restore support

On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 09:34:15PM +0530, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:

quoted

Russell, Thomas

quoted

-----Original Message-----
From: Russell King - ARM Linux [mailto:linux at arm.linux.org.uk]
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 7:08 PM
To: Thomas Gleixner
Cc: Colin Cross; Santosh Shilimkar; catalin.marinas at arm.com;
linus.ml.walleij at gmail.com; linux-omap at vger.kernel.org; linux-

arm-

quoted

quoted

kernel at lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] ARM: twd: Add context save restore

support

quoted

quoted

[...]

quoted

I can't say because these patches only add the hooks, there's no
implementation yet which uses the hooks.

Given the description about _why_ those hooks are necessary, it
seems
that something is required.  Either we start adding custom hacks

to

quoted

quoted

each clockevent driver as is done with this patch, or we get

some

quoted

quoted

generic help in place.

I'm not thrilled by the custom hack approach - and I thought the
clockevent stuff was created to stop this kind of thing

happening.

quoted

quoted

I suggest we defer this until there's a visible use case

available.

quoted

Got some time to debug this issue. OMAP idle code already has the
broad-cast notifiers working for sometime. So I removed the

existing

quoted

save restore twd code and just used the below patch which Russell
posted on this thread.
And things just work and I guess we are done with this issue !!
Timer framework is doing all right things with notifiers.

Am going to use this patch for my further work and drop the
save/restore patch. Will update you if there is any other
issue on this. I should have validated this patch on my own
earlier :(

Thanks for the discussion.

Thanks - I guess that's a tested-by then?

Sure.
Tested-by: Santosh Shilimkar <redacted>