[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2398042.a98hWjBeFo@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 15:30:04 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>
Cc: "guohanjun@...wei.com" <guohanjun@...wei.com>,
"hanjun.guo@...aro.org" <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>,
Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@....com>,
Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
"grant.likely@...aro.org" <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@....com>,
"graeme.gregory@...aro.org" <graeme.gregory@...aro.org>,
Sudeep Holla <Sudeep.Holla@....com>,
"jcm@...hat.com" <jcm@...hat.com>,
Marc Zyngier <Marc.Zyngier@....com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Robert Richter <rric@...nel.org>,
Timur Tabi <timur@...eaurora.org>,
Ashwin Chaugule <ashwinc@...eaurora.org>,
"suravee.suthikulpanit@....com" <suravee.suthikulpanit@....com>,
"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org" <linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org>,
Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@...aro.org>,
Zhangdianfang <zhangdianfang@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [update][PATCH v10 06/21] ACPI / sleep: Introduce CONFIG_ACPI_GENERIC_SLEEP
On Tuesday, March 17, 2015 12:35:36 PM Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 03:23:11AM +0000, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > > Do you mean remove CONFIG_ACPI_GENERIC_SLEEP and
> > >
> > > +acpi-$(CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP) += sleep.o
> > >
> > > as well (also need to remove duplicate #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP in sleep.c if
> > > we doing so)?
> >
> > Well, almost. There is one problem with that, becuase sleep.c contains code
> > outside of the ACPI_SLEEP-dependent blocks. That code is used for powering
> > off ACPI platforms.
> >
> > I guess you don't want that code on ARM too, right?
> >
> > Perhaps we can use ACPI_REDUCED_HARDWARE_ONLY for that? ARM64 will be the
> > only arch setting it at least for the time being, is that correct?
>
> HW reduced only platforms are still required to support sleep
> states that on arm64 are totally meaningless at present, so I do
> not think ACPI_REDUCED_HARDWARE_ONLY will cut it.
>
> Factoring out power_off methods from sleep.c ? I know, it is not nicer
> since you split the S-states management in multiple files.
>
> Side note: is the acpi_suspend() function in sleep.c used in the kernel ?
No, it isn't. I've just sent a patch to drop it.
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
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