[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20170921010421.7467-1-f.fainelli@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2017 18:04:19 -0700
From: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linus.walleij@...aro.org, swarren@...dia.com,
andy.shevchenko@...il.com, alcooperx@...il.com,
linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
robh+dt@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Subject: [PATCH 0/2] pinctrl: Allow indicating loss of state across suspend/resume
Hello Linus,
It's me again, so I have been thinking about the problem originally
reported in: [PATCH fixes v3] pinctrl: Really force states during suspend/resume
and other similar patches a while ago, and this new version allows a platform
using pinctrl-single to specify whether its pins are going to lose their state
during a system deep sleep.
Note that this is still checked at the pinctrl_select_state() because consumers
of the pinctrl API might be calling this from their suspend/resume functions
and should not have to know whether the provider does lose its pin states.
Thanks!
Florian Fainelli (2):
pinctrl: Allow a device to indicate when to force a state
pinctrl: single: Allow indicating loss of pin states during low-power
.../devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.txt | 4 ++++
drivers/pinctrl/core.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
drivers/pinctrl/core.h | 4 ++++
drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c | 3 +++
4 files changed, 26 insertions(+)
--
2.14.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists