linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: exynos7: add support for cpuidle core power down

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20141015140759.GB26484@red-moon>
Date:	Wed, 15 Oct 2014 15:07:59 +0100
From:	Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>
To:	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc:	Chander Kashyap <k.chander@...sung.com>,
	"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org" 
	<linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"daniel.lezcano@...aro.org" <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@....com>,
	"rjw@...ysocki.net" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	"kgene.kim@...sung.com" <kgene.kim@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: exynos7: add support for cpuidle core power
 down

On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 02:02:18PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > +			CPU_SLEEP: cpu-sleep {
> > > +				compatible = "arm,idle-state";
> > > +				local-timer-stop;
> > > +				arm,psci-suspend-param = <0x0010000>;
> > > +				entry-latency-us = <20>;
> > > +				exit-latency-us = <150>;
> > > +				min-residency-us = <2100>;
> > > +				status = "enabled";
> 
> While status is a relatively standard property, it's absence implies
> everything is OK. There no need for it here as-is.
> 
> Additionally, the canonical value is "okay", not "enabled", so this
> would fail were we to use of_device_is_available in the idle states
> parsing.

Good point. I still want it documented in the bindings, keeping in mind
your remark above.

> > status ? This is not a documented property. If you need it please explain
> > why, define its bindings and we can see how to accommodate it.
> 
> Do we expect that some idle states won't be available on some boards
> built from the same platform?

I think it is something we should expect and be able to cope with that.

I will add status to idle-states bindings updates for this cycle and patch DT
parsing code accordingly.

Lorenzo

--
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/