From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: nicolas.ferre@microchip.com (Nicolas Ferre) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2017 23:12:39 +0200 Subject: [PATCH v5] atmel_flexcom: Support backup mode In-Reply-To: References: <20171019164443.487-1-romain.izard.pro@gmail.com> <20171023160600.kcjy4ejdllllu62y@dell> <20171023160726.ufs37iyuicirwk4f@dell> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 23/10/2017 at 19:03, Romain Izard wrote: > 2017-10-23 18:07 GMT+02:00 Lee Jones : >> On Mon, 23 Oct 2017, Lee Jones wrote: >>> On Thu, 19 Oct 2017, Romain Izard wrote: >>> >>>> The controller used by a flexcom module is configured at boot, and left >>>> alone after this. As the configuration will be lost after backup mode, >>>> restore the state of the flexcom driver on resume. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Romain Izard >>>> Acked-by: Nicolas Ferre >>>> Tested-by: Nicolas Ferre >>>> --- >>>> Changes in v5: >>>> * extract from the patch series, and send as a standalone patch >>>> >>>> drivers/mfd/atmel-flexcom.c | 65 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- >>>> 1 file changed, 50 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/atmel-flexcom.c b/drivers/mfd/atmel-flexcom.c >>>> index 064bde9cff5a..ef1235c4a179 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/mfd/atmel-flexcom.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/mfd/atmel-flexcom.c >>>> @@ -39,34 +39,44 @@ >>>> #define FLEX_MR_OPMODE(opmode) (((opmode) << FLEX_MR_OPMODE_OFFSET) & \ >>>> FLEX_MR_OPMODE_MASK) >>>> >>>> +struct atmel_flexcom { >>>> + void __iomem *base; >>>> + u32 opmode; >>>> + struct clk *clk; >>>> +}; >>>> >>>> static int atmel_flexcom_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >>>> { >>>> struct device_node *np = pdev->dev.of_node; >>>> - struct clk *clk; >>>> struct resource *res; >>>> - void __iomem *base; >>>> - u32 opmode; >>>> + struct atmel_flexcom *afc; >>> >>> Nit: I'd prefer if you call this 'ddata'. >>> >>> But the concept and implementation is fine, so if you're going to >>> change it please do so and apply my: >>> >>> Acked-by: Lee Jones >> >> Also, 'back-up mode' isn't really a thing is it? >> >> How about "Reinstall state on resume" or similar? >> > > The expression comes from the SAMA5D2's datasheet. > > Other Atmel chips use a different single suspend mode with Linux, where > the SoC remains completely powered with a slow clock. The registers are > preserved in this mode, so there is no need for a specific suspend and > resume code. > > The SoC can also be powered down, but the CPU is reset and only a small > part is powered with a backup battery to maintain a valid RTC and a > small internal SRAM. > > In the SAMA5D2, the mode with only the backup power supply has been > extended to isolate the memory I/O lines, making it possible to keep the > external SDRAM memory in self-refresh. This mode has a lower consumption > compared to the slow clock mode, but it has a higher wakeup latency, and > needs specific software support in the bootloader and the kernel. > > As a result, the "backup mode" expression is used to contrast with the > "slow clock" expression when describing the different suspend modes > supported by the chip. aka: Ultra Low Power modes (ULP0 and ULP1). > But if you think that it is necessary, I can reword the commit. Thanks for the whole explanation Romain. Yes we have such a wording in our documents and we used some kind of "Backup mode", "Backup+Self-Refresh (B+SR or B+S-R)", "Backup and DDR in Self-refresh" or "suspend-to-mem" wording for our patches. I take advantage of this discussion to list all them here, for the record ;-) So, I have the feeling that together with the commit message itself, we can go with this wording. Best regards, -- Nicolas Ferre