[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAD=FV=V5LhsWWufUZ6vQwY3Om7mysjPzu-amQJeb8259OiPFzw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 16:55:28 -0700
From: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
To: Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@...il.com>
Cc: Heiko Stübner <heiko@...ech.de>,
Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>,
Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
Thomas Abraham <thomas.abraham@...aro.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Prathyush K <prathyush.k@...sung.com>,
linux-samsung-soc <linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: samsung: fix suspend/resume functionality
Tomasz,
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org> wrote:
> If state of these registers isn't lost on those SoCs then running the
> save/restore shouldn't _hurt_ though, right? If you can run the old
> GPIO code on one of those systems and do a suspend/resume you could
> check...
I think it's been too long of a day for me, too.
I just thought about this and realized that there is no "powerdown"
registers for the GPX banks on exynos5250. ...and they don't lose
their state at sleep! ...so maybe a reasonable thing to do would be
to skip save/restore in any case where there are no powerdown
registers?
You can see a printout in my case:
[ 412.840000] gpx0 @ f004ac00 (con 0x30000110 => 0x30000110)
[ 412.840000] gpx1 @ f004ac20 (con 0x1f10ff10 => 0x1f10ff10)
[ 412.840000] gpx2 @ f004ac40 (con 0x1f000f0f => 0x1f000f0f)
[ 412.840000] gpx3 @ f004ac60 (con 0x00f00f01 => 0x00f00f01)
-Doug
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists