From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA5D2C65BAE for ; Thu, 13 Dec 2018 14:53:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8096B2086D for ; Thu, 13 Dec 2018 14:53:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b="HK6vgmni" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 8096B2086D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=ti.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728244AbeLMOx0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Dec 2018 09:53:26 -0500 Received: from lelv0142.ext.ti.com ([198.47.23.249]:32944 "EHLO lelv0142.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727822AbeLMOx0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Dec 2018 09:53:26 -0500 Received: from fllv0035.itg.ti.com ([10.64.41.0]) by lelv0142.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id wBDErLG0113688; Thu, 13 Dec 2018 08:53:21 -0600 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1544712801; bh=f7VY4Z3gGV6eB6Le+1j72Q80oURNRIsisO+q/KSJm+A=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To; b=HK6vgmni6v/EcgYtU8LvimvsdzIz0I/1OpuNQiyHZ+0HqEqb7UYJc2rlBcepX2i1h sd42oL9cIMPfSweRoMefPfZ69Hhd2ap2R0xRvru1Df226i4kC5fufAppDWg8gL5b1/ AoPccKItTU8HhKDNqnosg6RMKaaVwHkF31lvig3o= Received: from DFLE107.ent.ti.com (dfle107.ent.ti.com [10.64.6.28]) by fllv0035.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id wBDErKMw035318 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 13 Dec 2018 08:53:20 -0600 Received: from DFLE103.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.24) by DFLE107.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.28) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1591.10; Thu, 13 Dec 2018 08:53:20 -0600 Received: from DFLE103.ent.ti.com ([fe80::7431:ea48:7659:dc14]) by DFLE103.ent.ti.com ([fe80::7431:ea48:7659:dc14%17]) with mapi id 15.01.1591.008; Thu, 13 Dec 2018 08:53:20 -0600 From: "Reizer, Eyal" To: Tony Lindgren , Ricardo Salveti CC: John Stultz , "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" , "anders.roxell@linaro.org" Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: wlcore getting stuck on hikey after the runtime PM autosuspend support change Thread-Topic: [EXTERNAL] Re: wlcore getting stuck on hikey after the runtime PM autosuspend support change Thread-Index: AQHUkbxvUowIl7JGdE2qw59YlHGbqKV6synggAEfrwCAAA7kAIAAaVEwgADMRACAAA6+AP//nPHg Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2018 14:53:20 +0000 Message-ID: <12a609f677aa48f8b2aadba69edf342a@ti.com> References: <20181211201221.GY39861@atomide.com> <20181212014556.GC39861@atomide.com> <20181212183116.GH39861@atomide.com> <9060b4655e064665a1812d9fae00f1ec@ti.com> <20181213144522.GO39861@atomide.com> In-Reply-To: <20181213144522.GO39861@atomide.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [137.167.25.139] x-exclaimer-md-config: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org > > I tried just increasing WL1271_PRE_POWER_ON_SLEEP from 20ms to > 50ms > > (which gets used before calling wl12xx_sdio_power_on), and that was > > already enough to fix my issues on both hikey and beaglebone black > > wireless. >=20 > OK good to hear that helps :) >=20 > > Should we define another pre power on sleep specifically for the sdio > > case (and use directly in wl12xx_sdio_power_on)? >=20 > I'd probably prefer to just increase WL1271_PRE_POWER_ON_SLEEP, > chances are the same delay is needed in all cases. >=20 > Up to Eyeal to decide though as far as I'm concerned. >=20 I tend to agree with Tony. Probably better to just increase the value. Best Regards, Eyal