From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tony Lindgren Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: power: Introduce suspend states supported properties Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2018 06:32:28 -0700 Message-ID: <20180912133228.GI5662@atomide.com> References: <1536725372-29174-1-git-send-email-j-keerthy@ti.com> <781b2eb2-1568-b4e5-46f2-c4612862d728@arm.com> <5c49cb0c-a436-c957-e6b3-5f3aa7af92f9@ti.com> <2c08c85f-a3e0-c1ce-3f87-0866868bd7e4@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2c08c85f-a3e0-c1ce-3f87-0866868bd7e4@arm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Sudeep Holla Cc: Keerthy , mark.rutland@arm.com, robh+dt@kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, t-kristo@ti.com List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org * Sudeep Holla [180912 11:41]: > On 12/09/18 12:19, Keerthy wrote: > > suspend to mem and suspend to disk are pretty generic states and i agree > > implementation is platform dependent so why not have properties that > > convey if they are supported? > > > > We already have power domains and idle states for that. If you need to > restrict few states on some platform for whatever reasons, just disable > those states. I don't see the need to add any more bindings for the same. Oh do you mean the "domain-idle-states" property as mentioned in the Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/power_domain.txt? Yeah that should do and the DOMAIN_PWR_DN and DOMAIN_RET can be SoC specific and then the board can select which ones to use depending on how things are wired for GPIOs, memory, PMIC and so on. Hmm I don't see any users for this binding though? Regards, Tony