[PATCH 1/3] ARM: imx: Add common imx cpuidle init functionality.

[Rob Lee]

On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Shawn Guo <shawn.guo at linaro.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 08:54:26AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 09:38:43AM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
>> > On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 10:45:02AM -0500, Rob Lee wrote:
>> > > >> Let me try last time.  What about having a late_initcall hook in
>> > > >> machine_desc?
>> > > >
>> > > > Also fine with me.
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > Shall I add Shawn's patch to my imx cpuidle patchset or should the
>> > > arch/arm/kernel/setup.c and arch.h changes be submitted separately?
>> > > If separately, Shawn, did you want to submit this patch or should I?
>> > >
>> > Strange.  Russell is not in the Cc list.  I remember I added Russell
>> > into Cc when I propose the idea.  Added him again.
>>
>> I didn't see any message in this thread cc'd to me, but that's not to
>> say I hadn't already read this patch.  I don't have any comment against
>> it, but I do wonder how often this hook would be used.
>>
> I guess mach-* that use common cpuidle will likely need this hook.
>
>> We do seem to have quite a number of late_initcall()s in arch/arm/mach-*,
>> so it seems to be a good idea - provided someone's willing to convert all
>> those users of late_initcall()s.
>
> Agreed.  The late_initcall()s in arch/arm/mach-* will not scale for
> long time, since we are moving toward single build.
>

Thanks for the attention on this.  From what I've understood, I will
send another submission that includes the imx cpuidle patchset and
Shawn's device tree late initcall patchset and I'll provide
explanation of the two separate patchsets in the cover sheet.

> --
> Regards,
> Shawn