From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dmitry Osipenko Subject: Re: [PATCH] soc: tegra: pmc: restrict compilation of suspend-related support to ARM Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 18:24:39 +0300 Message-ID: <54AD4FB7.20600@gmail.com> References: <20150107143354.GD1621@ulmo> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20150107143354.GD1621@ulmo> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Thierry Reding , Paul Walmsley Cc: linux-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org, Kumar Gala , Paul Walmsley , Thierry Reding , Allen Martin , Stephen Warren , Alexandre Courbot List-Id: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org 07.01.2015 17:33, Thierry Reding =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5=D1=82: > On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 10:36:50PM +0000, Paul Walmsley wrote: >> >> Tegra SoCs with 64-bit ARM support don't currently support deep CPU >> low-power states in mainline Linux. When this support is added in t= he >> future, it will probably look rather different from the existing >> 32-bit ARM support, since the ARM64 maintainers' strong preference i= s >> to use PSCI to implement it. >> >> So, for the time being, prevent the CPU suspend-related code and dat= a >> in the Tegra PMC driver from compiling on ARM64. >> >> Signed-off-by: Paul Walmsley >> Signed-off-by: Paul Walmsley >> Cc: Thierry Reding >> Cc: Allen Martin >> Cc: Stephen Warren >> Cc: Alexandre Courbot >> --- >> Applies on next-20141209. >> Intended for v3.20. >> Boot-tested on Tegra124 Jetson TK1 on next-20141209. >> Also boot-tested on Tegra132 Norrin FFD on next-20141209 + some unre= lated=20 >> patches. >> >> drivers/soc/tegra/pmc.c | 7 +++++-- >> include/soc/tegra/pm.h | 2 +- >> 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >=20 > On second thought, I decided to apply this as-is. >=20 > Thanks, > Thierry >=20 Oh, I haven't noticed this patch before... I sent patch fixing tegra20 suspend bug [ http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/423778/ ] and it will obviously confl= ict with this one. =46or now there is no feedback for my suspend bug patch (other than for= V1), but, if it's fine, I think it would be easier to rebase Paul's patch on top = of it. Any other suggestions? --=20 Dmitry