RE: [PATCH v4] ARM: perf: save/restore pmu registers in pm notifier

[Neil Zhang]

Will & Sudeep,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Neil Zhang
> Sent: 2014å5æ5æ 14:28
> To: Sudeep Holla; Will Deacon
> Cc: linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [PATCH v4] ARM: perf: save/restore pmu registers in pm notifier
> 
> Sudeep,
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Sudeep Holla [mailto:sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx]
> > Sent: 2014å4æ30æ 21:31
> > To: Neil Zhang; Will Deacon
> > Cc: Sudeep Holla; linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] ARM: perf: save/restore pmu registers in pm
> > notifier
> >
> > Hi Neil,
> >
> > On 30/04/14 03:21, Neil Zhang wrote:
> > >
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: Will Deacon [mailto:will.deacon@xxxxxxx]
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > >>
> > >> I think we need some input from the device-tree guys to see whether
> > >> they would object to us solving this locally (in the PMU node) or not.
> > >> Personally, I'd much prefer a general way to describe the need for
> > >> pm-notifiers, but if that's not being looked at then we can cook
> > >> something specifically for our needs.
> > >>
> > >
> > > No input from device-tree guys :(
> >
> > The device tree bindings for power domains is under discussion [1]
> 
> Thanks for the information.
> But it currently for device only, core related stuff are not supported.
> And is it really good to register power provider for core and let vfp / pmu etc
> to get it?
> 

What's your suggestion about it?
Is it OK that I add it under the PMU node?

> >
> > Regards,
> > Sudeep
> >
> > [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/4/23/755
> 
> 
> Best Regards,
> Neil Zhang

Best Regards,
Neil Zhang