[lkml]   [2019]   [Jan]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 2/3] regulator: core: add helper to check if regulator is disabled in suspend

On 09.01.2019 18:57, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 08, 2019 at 10:56:32AM +0000, wrote:
>> From: Claudiu Beznea <>
>> Add helper to check if regulator will be disabled in suspend.
>> Signed-off-by: Claudiu Beznea <>
> 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


 \ /
  Last update: 2019-01-10 11:25    [W:0.071 / U:0.892 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site