From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lina Iyer Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] arm64: dts: msm8916: Add spc compat tag Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 15:16:36 -0600 Message-ID: <20160610211636.GA38979@linaro.org> References: <1463634020-17252-1-git-send-email-andy.gross@linaro.org> <1463634020-17252-4-git-send-email-andy.gross@linaro.org> <20160610154857.GA6430@leverpostej> <20160610161234.GO13357@hector.attlocal.net> <20160610162555.GB6430@leverpostej> <20160610164721.GP13357@hector.attlocal.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Return-path: Received: from mail-pa0-f48.google.com ([209.85.220.48]:35298 "EHLO mail-pa0-f48.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750888AbcFJVQq (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Jun 2016 17:16:46 -0400 Received: by mail-pa0-f48.google.com with SMTP id hl6so26977940pac.2 for ; Fri, 10 Jun 2016 14:16:46 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160610164721.GP13357@hector.attlocal.net> Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: Andy Gross Cc: Mark Rutland , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, stanimir.varbanov@linaro.org, lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com On Fri, Jun 10 2016 at 10:47 -0600, Andy Gross wrote: >On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 05:25:55PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 11:12:34AM -0500, Andy Gross wrote: >> > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 04:48:57PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: >> > > [+ Lorenzo] >> > > >> > > On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 12:00:18AM -0500, Andy Gross wrote: <...> >> >> > I chose to do this outside of the arm cpuidle driver because I didn't want to >> > add any more DT information aside from the compatible, and I needed a separate >> > place for the Qualcomm specific suspend code. >> >> Which suspend code is Qualcomm-specific? There shouldn't be anything on >> the PSCI side, so I can only imagine that device management is left. >> What am I missing? > >Qualcomm won't be supporting the psci suspend feature and will be doing their >own thing. As such, they need their own suspend ops. In addition, we have >platforms that don't use psci (32 bit). > Andy, which PSCI suspend feature are you referring to, here? On 8916, we do support CPU_SUSPEND in PSCI. You don't want to call SYSTEM_SUSPEND, as it requires the other CPUs to be CPU_OFF (hotplugged off) before the last core calls this PSCI function. Lina