From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jon Hunter Subject: Re: [PATCH V6 06/10] soc: tegra: pmc: Wait for powergate state to change Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 10:38:29 +0000 Message-ID: <56D41FA5.5050205@nvidia.com> References: <1456501724-28477-1-git-send-email-jonathanh@nvidia.com> <1456501724-28477-7-git-send-email-jonathanh@nvidia.com> <20160229072415.GI23745@ulmo> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20160229072415.GI23745@ulmo> Sender: linux-tegra-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Thierry Reding Cc: Stephen Warren , Alexandre Courbot , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Kevin Hilman , Ulf Hansson , Rob Herring , Pawel Moll , Mark Rutland , Ian Campbell , Kumar Gala , linux-tegra-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-pm-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org On 29/02/16 07:24, Thierry Reding wrote: > * PGP Signed by an unknown key > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 03:48:40PM +0000, Jon Hunter wrote: >> Currently, the function tegra_powergate_set() simply sets the desired >> powergate state but does not wait for the state to change. In most cases >> we should wait for the state to change before proceeding. Currently, there >> is a case for tegra114 and tegra124 devices where we do not wait when >> starting the secondary CPU as this is not necessary. However, this is only >> done at boot time and so waiting here will only have a small impact on >> boot time. Therefore, update tegra_powergate_set() to wait when setting >> the powergate. >> >> By adding this feature, we can also eliminate the polling loop from >> tegra30_boot_secondary(). >> >> A function has been added for checking the status of the powergate and >> so update the tegra_powergate_is_powered() to use this macro as well. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jon Hunter >> --- >> arch/arm/mach-tegra/platsmp.c | 16 +++------------- >> drivers/soc/tegra/pmc.c | 9 ++++++++- >> 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > > This looks to be independent from the generic power domain support. Can > I apply this separately (for 4.6, without waiting for the power domain > series' dependencies to go in)? Yes this could be applied independently of this series for v4.6. I just wanted to make sure that this change is added before the genpd changes are applied. Cheers Jon