[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <73b16f5c-fe19-e652-dfd0-de7196d4cec0@codeaurora.org>
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2018 22:49:14 +0530
From: Vivek Gautam <vivek.gautam@...eaurora.org>
To: Tomasz Figa <tfiga@...omium.org>
Cc: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>,
"open list:IOMMU DRIVERS" <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
jcrouse@...eaurora.org, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
Sricharan R <sricharan@...eaurora.org>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
Archit Taneja <architt@...eaurora.org>,
linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 0/5] iommu/arm-smmu: Add runtime pm/sleep support
Hi Tomasz,
On 3/5/2018 6:55 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> Hi Vivek,
>
> On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 7:10 PM, Vivek Gautam
> <vivek.gautam@...eaurora.org> wrote:
>> This series provides the support for turning on the arm-smmu's
>> clocks/power domains using runtime pm. This is done using the
>> recently introduced device links patches, which lets the smmu's
>> runtime to follow the master's runtime pm, so the smmu remains
>> powered only when the masters use it.
>>
>> It also adds support for Qcom's arm-smmu-v2 variant that
>> has different clocks and power requirements.
>>
>> Took some reference from the exynos runtime patches [1].
>>
>> After another round of discussion [3], we now finally seem to be
>> in agreement to add a flag based on compatible, a flag that would
>> indicate if a particular implementation of arm-smmu supports
>> runtime pm or not.
>> This lets us to use the much-argued pm_runtime_get_sync/put_sync()
>> calls in map/unmap callbacks so that the clients do not have to
>> worry about handling any of the arm-smmu's power.
>> The patch that exported couple of pm_runtime suppliers APIS, viz.
>> pm_runtime_get_suppliers(), and pm_runtime_put_suppliers() can be
>> dropped since we don't have a user now for these APIs.
>> Thanks Rafael for reviewing the changes, but looks like we don't
>> need to export those APIs for some more time. :)
>>
>> Previous version of this patch series is @ [5].
> Thanks for addressing my comments. There is still a bit of space for
> improving the granularity of power management, as far as I understood
> how it works on SDM845 correctly, but as a first step, this should at
> least let things work.
Sure. I will be sending a patch, based on this series, to add
'qcom,smmu-500'
that enables *rpm_suported* flag for us.
We can try to take care of some of the things with that.
> Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa <tfiga@...omium.org>
Thanks for the review.
regards
Vivek
>
> Best regards,
> Tomasz
Powered by blists - more mailing lists