From: Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>
To: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
Cc: "J, KEERTHY" <j-keerthy@ti.com>, Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>,
d-gerlach@ti.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, t-kristo@ti.com,
ssantosh@kernel.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] soc: ti: pm33xx: Enable DS0 for the platforms on which it is functional
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2018 09:05:06 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180827070506.GW14967@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180822142220.GG7523@atomide.com>
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 07:22:20AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * J, KEERTHY <j-keerthy@ti.com> [180822 11:11]:
> > On 8/22/2018 2:13 PM, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > > Yes, and a blacklist would make much more sense for something like this
> > > if where talking about specific boards.
> >
> > Black list is easier here?
>
> After thinking about this a bit more I think the boards supporting
> deep sleep should add a PM related dts property to enable deep sleep.
>
> The board maintainers need to test and verify deep sleep for each
> board, it's not something that just works for the SoC in general.
> Some boards may use different powering for things like DDR where
> it's power might be controlled by a GPIO regulator. And in some
> cases deeper idle states may depend also on the PMIC being used.
>
> Maybe we already have some dts property we can use to describe
> the idle states the board hardware supports?
Yeah, unless you can infer this from an existing tree I guess you need
to add a new property. And indeed, a driver blacklist would suffer from the
same fundamental problem (with an ever expanding list of machines) as a
whitelist even if it would avoid regressing currently working systems.
Johan
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: johan@kernel.org (Johan Hovold)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] soc: ti: pm33xx: Enable DS0 for the platforms on which it is functional
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2018 09:05:06 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180827070506.GW14967@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180822142220.GG7523@atomide.com>
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 07:22:20AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * J, KEERTHY <j-keerthy@ti.com> [180822 11:11]:
> > On 8/22/2018 2:13 PM, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > > Yes, and a blacklist would make much more sense for something like this
> > > if where talking about specific boards.
> >
> > Black list is easier here?
>
> After thinking about this a bit more I think the boards supporting
> deep sleep should add a PM related dts property to enable deep sleep.
>
> The board maintainers need to test and verify deep sleep for each
> board, it's not something that just works for the SoC in general.
> Some boards may use different powering for things like DDR where
> it's power might be controlled by a GPIO regulator. And in some
> cases deeper idle states may depend also on the PMIC being used.
>
> Maybe we already have some dts property we can use to describe
> the idle states the board hardware supports?
Yeah, unless you can infer this from an existing tree I guess you need
to add a new property. And indeed, a driver blacklist would suffer from the
same fundamental problem (with an ever expanding list of machines) as a
whitelist even if it would avoid regressing currently working systems.
Johan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-08-27 7:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-22 5:32 [PATCH] soc: ti: pm33xx: Enable DS0 for the platforms on which it is functional Keerthy
2018-08-22 5:32 ` Keerthy
2018-08-22 5:32 ` Keerthy
2018-08-22 7:34 ` Johan Hovold
2018-08-22 7:34 ` Johan Hovold
2018-08-22 7:37 ` Johan Hovold
2018-08-22 7:37 ` Johan Hovold
2018-08-22 8:20 ` J, KEERTHY
2018-08-22 8:20 ` J, KEERTHY
2018-08-22 8:20 ` J, KEERTHY
2018-08-22 8:43 ` Johan Hovold
2018-08-22 8:43 ` Johan Hovold
2018-08-22 11:07 ` J, KEERTHY
2018-08-22 11:07 ` J, KEERTHY
2018-08-22 11:07 ` J, KEERTHY
2018-08-22 14:22 ` Tony Lindgren
2018-08-22 14:22 ` Tony Lindgren
2018-08-27 7:05 ` Johan Hovold [this message]
2018-08-27 7:05 ` Johan Hovold
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180827070506.GW14967@localhost \
--to=johan@kernel.org \
--cc=d-gerlach@ti.com \
--cc=j-keerthy@ti.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ssantosh@kernel.org \
--cc=t-kristo@ti.com \
--cc=tony@atomide.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.