From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sudeep Holla Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 02/15] dt/bindings: Update binding for PM domain idle states Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 19:13:36 +0100 Message-ID: References: <1470351902-43103-1-git-send-email-lina.iyer@linaro.org> <1470351902-43103-3-git-send-email-lina.iyer@linaro.org> <99e35b6c-6698-6d27-f4d7-fa032796869e@arm.com> <20160810164034.GA1401@linaro.org> <5e59874c-bbb7-270a-199c-da1ff5932554@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <5e59874c-bbb7-270a-199c-da1ff5932554@arm.com> Sender: linux-arm-msm-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Lina Iyer Cc: Sudeep Holla , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, ulf.hansson@linaro.org, khilman@kernel.org, rjw@rjwysocki.net, andy.gross@linaro.org, sboyd@codeaurora.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, Axel Haslam , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Marc Titinger , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Brendan Jackman , Juri Lelli List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On 10/08/16 19:09, Sudeep Holla wrote: > > > On 10/08/16 17:40, Lina Iyer wrote: >> Hi Sudeep, >> >> On Wed, Aug 10 2016 at 09:15 -0600, Sudeep Holla wrote: >>> Hi Lina, >>> >>> I have few concerns mainly due to the lack of description and not the >>> binding per say. > > [...] > >>>> +- domain-idle-states : A phandle of an idle-state that shall be >>>> soaked into a >>>> + generic domain power state. The idle state >>>> definitions are >>>> + compatible with arm,idle-state specified in [1]. >>>> + >>> >>> So I assume these can be used for the genpd states. Either we rename >>> it domain-power-states or make it clear that these domain-idle-states >>> can also represent the power-states for normal devices. >>> >> These are the domains' idle states. These states are only used when the >> domain goes into idle, not when the domain is active. These are not >> power states that the domain can operate on either. Hence the idle-state >> moniker. > > I am not sure if we can tell that the device is running in all it's > power states. E.g. in ACPI IIUC, only D0 state represent running state, > while D{1,2,3} are power states which consume less power than D0/running > state. I think genpd is designed on those lines. > I didn't complete this section earlier. Just to clarify we can label them as idle states or whatever. Strictly speaking today even cpu-idle-states have power off state, so the term is not important. What I intended to say is that it should be able to describe even device idle(power states minus the active running) states. -- Regards, Sudeep