From: <Claudiu.Beznea@microchip.com>
To: <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: <Nicolas.Ferre@microchip.com>, <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>,
<Ludovic.Desroches@microchip.com>, <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
<lgirdwood@gmail.com>, <rjw@rjwysocki.net>, <pavel@ucw.cz>,
<len.brown@intel.com>, <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] regulator: core: add helper to check if regulator is disabled in suspend
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2019 10:24:26 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <76298993-c1e8-1b00-6a54-5d41c48bc2d3@microchip.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190109165706.GG10405@sirena.org.uk>
On 09.01.2019 18:57, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 08, 2019 at 10:56:32AM +0000, Claudiu.Beznea@microchip.com wrote:
>> From: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@microchip.com>
>>
>> Add helper to check if regulator will be disabled in suspend.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@microchip.com>
>
> This feels like it's the wrong way round - if this is configurable I'd
> expect something to configure the suspend mode and then for that to
> arrange to configure the regulator appropriately (along with anything
> else that needs doing) rather than to infer the configuration from the
> regulator state which feels fragile. But based on the cover letter
> that's kind of like what the initial proposal about target states was so
> perhaps this is the way we end up going...
Are you talking about [1] ?
this certainly looks a lot
> less impactful that the target state stuff though.
>
For the moment, the patches which describes the regulators states in
suspend for SAMA5D2 Xplained board (which we are trying to address here)
are in pending [2] (they were introduced with patches for act8945a
suspend/resume stuff). Probably they will be introduced after one more
Linux version.
I can get rid of this patch, take advantage of [3] and [4] and introduce
also the regulator standby states. In this case, no matter the mapping b/w
Linux power saving modes and AT91 SoC's power saving modes, we will be
covered on misconfiguration (at least on SAMA5D2 Xplained board).
And in patch 3/3 I could get rid of regulator checks and rely on DT (bad
thing would be that in case of no input for regulator's state in
mem/standby the board could not properly suspended/resumed), if any.
What do you think about this?
Thank you,
Claudiu Beznea
[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9458445/
[2]
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1544543768-2066-6-git-send-email-claudiu.beznea@microchip.com/
[3]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/regulator.git/commit/?h=for-next&id=f2b4076988a9c229dab373470b4b108ef0e106c8
[4]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/regulator.git/commit/?h=for-next&id=5279e96ff8033500b6008be5925ae2d20f42c434
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-10 10:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-08 10:56 [PATCH v2 0/3] add support for power off check " Claudiu.Beznea
2019-01-08 10:56 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] PM / Suspend: Add support to check if platform's power is off " Claudiu.Beznea
2019-01-09 14:14 ` Pavel Machek
2019-01-10 10:24 ` Claudiu.Beznea
2019-01-08 10:56 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] regulator: core: add helper to check if regulator is disabled " Claudiu.Beznea
2019-01-09 16:57 ` Mark Brown
2019-01-10 10:24 ` Claudiu.Beznea [this message]
2019-01-11 12:39 ` Mark Brown
2019-01-11 14:08 ` Claudiu.Beznea
2019-01-14 22:53 ` Mark Brown
2019-01-15 9:19 ` Claudiu.Beznea
2019-01-08 10:56 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] ARM: at91: pm: add support for .off_in_suspend Claudiu.Beznea
2019-01-08 11:46 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] add support for power off check in suspend Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-01-08 14:07 ` Claudiu.Beznea
2019-01-28 9:50 ` Claudiu.Beznea
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=76298993-c1e8-1b00-6a54-5d41c48bc2d3@microchip.com \
--to=claudiu.beznea@microchip.com \
--cc=Ludovic.Desroches@microchip.com \
--cc=Nicolas.Ferre@microchip.com \
--cc=alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®