From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ulf Hansson Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC v2] ARM: amba: Remove AMBA level regulator support Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 11:54:21 +0200 Message-ID: <4F87F7CD.4000004@stericsson.com> References: <1333306720-28344-1-git-send-email-broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <4F87EBFC.90000@stericsson.com> <20120413091828.GJ3168@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Russell King , Samuel Ortiz , Linus Walleij , "linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , "spi-devel-general-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org" , "linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org" To: Mark Brown Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20120413091828.GJ3168-yzvPICuk2AATkU/dhu1WVueM+bqZidxxQQ4Iyu8u01E@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: spi-devel-general-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-spi.vger.kernel.org On 04/13/2012 11:18 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 11:03:56AM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote: > >> But, how should those amba drivers that implements runtime PM >> support be able to switch of the vcore regulator during normal >> suspend? In normal suspend case we can not use > > A generic AMBA driver should have no idea about the implementation of > the particular SoC that it's integrated on to. This applies even more > to system suspend (where drivers can generally just assume that they > will loose all power normally) than it does to runtime suspend. > >> pm_runtime_put/pm_runtime_put_sync to trigger the power domain >> runtime functions to switch of vcore. This is kind of more generic >> problem when dealing with power domains, but as said this patch will >> have consequences. > > The power domain gets callbacks on the system suspend path too and can > do whatever is sensible there. > >> As far as I can see, the power domain must then implement a >> suspend_noirq function to make sure same things is done as for the >> runtime_suspend function. Do you agree with this as well or is there >> another option? > > Yes, the power domain should just be handling this transparently. Alright, thanks for your confirmation. Let's see how this works out then. Kind regards Ulf Hansson ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Developers, A Lot Can Happen In A Second. Boundary is the first to Know...and Tell You. Monitor Your Applications in Ultra-Fine Resolution. Try it FREE! http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-d2dvs2 From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ulf.hansson@stericsson.com (Ulf Hansson) Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 11:54:21 +0200 Subject: [PATCH/RFC v2] ARM: amba: Remove AMBA level regulator support In-Reply-To: <20120413091828.GJ3168@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <1333306720-28344-1-git-send-email-broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <4F87EBFC.90000@stericsson.com> <20120413091828.GJ3168@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Message-ID: <4F87F7CD.4000004@stericsson.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 04/13/2012 11:18 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 11:03:56AM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote: > >> But, how should those amba drivers that implements runtime PM >> support be able to switch of the vcore regulator during normal >> suspend? In normal suspend case we can not use > > A generic AMBA driver should have no idea about the implementation of > the particular SoC that it's integrated on to. This applies even more > to system suspend (where drivers can generally just assume that they > will loose all power normally) than it does to runtime suspend. > >> pm_runtime_put/pm_runtime_put_sync to trigger the power domain >> runtime functions to switch of vcore. This is kind of more generic >> problem when dealing with power domains, but as said this patch will >> have consequences. > > The power domain gets callbacks on the system suspend path too and can > do whatever is sensible there. > >> As far as I can see, the power domain must then implement a >> suspend_noirq function to make sure same things is done as for the >> runtime_suspend function. Do you agree with this as well or is there >> another option? > > Yes, the power domain should just be handling this transparently. Alright, thanks for your confirmation. Let's see how this works out then. Kind regards Ulf Hansson From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934648Ab2DMJys (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Apr 2012 05:54:48 -0400 Received: from eu1sys200aog103.obsmtp.com ([207.126.144.115]:36521 "EHLO eu1sys200aog103.obsmtp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758223Ab2DMJyr (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Apr 2012 05:54:47 -0400 Message-ID: <4F87F7CD.4000004@stericsson.com> Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 11:54:21 +0200 From: Ulf Hansson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.24) Gecko/20111108 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.16 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Brown Cc: Russell King , Grant Likely , Linus Walleij , Samuel Ortiz , "spi-devel-general@lists.sourceforge.net" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC v2] ARM: amba: Remove AMBA level regulator support References: <1333306720-28344-1-git-send-email-broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <4F87EBFC.90000@stericsson.com> <20120413091828.GJ3168@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> In-Reply-To: <20120413091828.GJ3168@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 04/13/2012 11:18 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 11:03:56AM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote: > >> But, how should those amba drivers that implements runtime PM >> support be able to switch of the vcore regulator during normal >> suspend? In normal suspend case we can not use > > A generic AMBA driver should have no idea about the implementation of > the particular SoC that it's integrated on to. This applies even more > to system suspend (where drivers can generally just assume that they > will loose all power normally) than it does to runtime suspend. > >> pm_runtime_put/pm_runtime_put_sync to trigger the power domain >> runtime functions to switch of vcore. This is kind of more generic >> problem when dealing with power domains, but as said this patch will >> have consequences. > > The power domain gets callbacks on the system suspend path too and can > do whatever is sensible there. > >> As far as I can see, the power domain must then implement a >> suspend_noirq function to make sure same things is done as for the >> runtime_suspend function. Do you agree with this as well or is there >> another option? > > Yes, the power domain should just be handling this transparently. Alright, thanks for your confirmation. Let's see how this works out then. Kind regards Ulf Hansson