[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5e61618b-cfb0-ddff-3d87-bf512521e669@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2017 14:23:03 -0700
From: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>,
Al Cooper <alcooperx@...il.com>,
"open list:PIN CONTROL SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH fixes v3] pinctrl: Really force states during
suspend/resume
(sorry for the lag)
On 03/16/2017 07:08 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 3:18 AM, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com> wrote:
>> On 03/14/2017 03:16 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
>
>>> The most obvious would be to use the API as many already do:
>>> define "sleep" states in the core, and switch to these before
>>> going to sleep. If CONFIG_PM is available simply by calling
>>> pinctrl_pm_select_sleep_state() in the driver suspend() callback.
>>
>> Well, the difficulty for our platforms is that S2 does not make the HW
>> lose pin states, only S3 does and drivers should be agnostic of S2 vs. S3.
>>
>> There is not really a "sleep" and "default" state defined for these
>> platforms just the "default" state. I initially even considered adding a
>> fake "sleep" state just to satisfy the state transition condition, but
>> that does not accurately represent the HW.
>
> Do you mean that on the way up, on the resume path, you know> whether the setting was lost or not?
In S3 we loose the hardware contents, and in S2 we do not. A platform
device driver has no way (currently) in its suspend/resume callback to
know which state was entered/exited.
>
> Or you don't know it anywhere?
>
> It is not less elegant to uncessesarily switch to a sleep state
> than to unnecessarily program the default state when you only
> went into S2 in that case.
Agreed, but defining a sleep state that does not exist just to force a
transition to the default state upon resumption is not really elegant.
>
> I guess then it is better to assume we will loose the state, or
> push for more granular handling of S2/3 etc states in the
> PM core (I guess these states comes from ACPI or similar).
I expected to see pm_message_t reflect which state we were entering into
(PM_SUSPEND_STANDBY vs. PM_SUSPEND_MEM), but that is not the case.
>
>>> Alternatively we would add a function to set the pinctrl handle to
>>> an "unknown" state, so that when we resume, the pinctrl core at
>>> least knows that we are not in "default" state anymore, so that
>>> "default" is applied.
>>
>> And such a function would be called during driver suspend? Would not we
>> still end-up with the drivers having to know about the fact that there
>> is a) only one pin state defined, and b) these pins potentially lose
>> their states in some deep sleep mode?
>
> Again, the proposal to switch to default state twice just because
> we do not know how deep sleep we went into isn't any more
> elegant. Then it is better to just assume we lost the state at
> all times.
>
> Alternatively develop the PM core. Is it really impossible for
> PM hooks to know which state it went into/came from?
I don't think I liked Rafael's suggestion of putting that kind of detail
into the platform_suspend_ops routine as he seems to suggest here:
https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg587311.html
and here is my response:
https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg589844.html
--
Florian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists