From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sudeep Holla Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 3/6] drivers: firmware: psci: Implement shallow suspend mode Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 14:35:37 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1487622809-25127-1-git-send-email-geert+renesas@glider.be> <1487622809-25127-4-git-send-email-geert+renesas@glider.be> <20170221110712.GB5021@amd> <3caf0f3f-76e5-cb1e-7c0f-87ed5e1c2b86@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-renesas-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Geert Uytterhoeven Cc: Sudeep Holla , Pavel Machek , Geert Uytterhoeven , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Mark Rutland , Lina Iyer , John Stultz , Thomas Gleixner , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Len Brown , Rob Herring , Magnus Damm , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Linux-Renesas , Linux PM list , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 22/02/17 13:47, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Sudeep, > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 6:22 PM, Sudeep Holla wrote: [...] >> >> IIUC, it's not implemented today. I can't talk about future ;), but your > > Good, so there's no need for the DT property, and drivers/firmware/psci.c > should aways call do_cpu_idle() instead of PSCI SYSTEM_SUSPEND if any > other wake-up sources are configured? > No. > That follows the principle of least surprise: it doesn't leave the user with > a system that won't wake up the way he configured it to wake up. > But he can still wake up with the "switch" so there's no surprise. He just need to better understand his system before playing with it ;) -- Regards, Sudeep