lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Sep]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] dt-bindings: power: Introduce suspend states supported properties
From
Date


On 12/09/18 14:32, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> [180912 11:41]:
>> On 12/09/18 12:19, Keerthy wrote:
>>> suspend to mem and suspend to disk are pretty generic states and i agree
>>> implementation is platform dependent so why not have properties that
>>> convey if they are supported?
>>>
>>
>> We already have power domains and idle states for that. If you need to
>> restrict few states on some platform for whatever reasons, just disable
>> those states. I don't see the need to add any more bindings for the same.
>
> Oh do you mean the "domain-idle-states" property as mentioned in the
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/power_domain.txt?
>

Yes, exactly that.

> Yeah that should do and the DOMAIN_PWR_DN and DOMAIN_RET can be SoC
> specific and then the board can select which ones to use depending on
> how things are wired for GPIOs, memory, PMIC and so on.
>

All the idle-states are platform specific. DOMAIN_RET and DOMAIN_PWR_DN
are just examples used in the bindings.

> Hmm I don't see any users for this binding though?
>

It was added specifically to deal with such SoC idles states or
hierarchical CPU power domains states, no users in upstream yet. But IMO
it fits what $subject is trying to address.

--
Regards,
Sudeep

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-09-12 15:44    [W:0.055 / U:26.528 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site