[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181119113816.GP5829@dragon>
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2018 19:38:18 +0800
From: Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>
To: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>
Cc: Leonard Crestez <leonard.crestez@....com>,
Lucas Stach <l.stach@...gutronix.de>,
Richard Zhu <hongxing.zhu@....com>,
Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@....com>,
Stefan Agner <stefan@...er.ch>, Marek Vasut <marex@...x.de>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
"dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@....com>,
"kernel@...gutronix.de" <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] PCI: imx: Add multi-pd support
On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 12:25:41PM +0000, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 08, 2018 at 06:06:21PM +0000, Leonard Crestez wrote:
> > On some chips the PCIE and PCIE_PHY blocks are in separate power domains
> > which can be power-gated independently. The pci driver needs to handle
> > this by keeping both domain active.
> >
> > This is intended for imx6sx where PCIE is in DISPLAY and PCIE_PHY in
> > it's own domain. Defining the DISPLAY domain requires a way for pcie to
> > keep it active or it will break when displays are off.
> >
> > The power-domains on imx6sx are meant to look like this:
> > power-domains = <&pd_disp>, <&pd_pci>;
> > power-domain-names = "pcie", "pcie_phy";
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Leonard Crestez <leonard.crestez@....com>
> > Reviewed-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
> > ---
> > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-imx6.c | 48 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 48 insertions(+)
>
> I expect Shawn to pick the whole series up and therefore I am dropping
> this series from the PCI tree.
Lorenzo,
I think the best approach is that you send patch #2 and #3 for 4.21
through PCI tree, and we will be able to apply patch #4 in 4.22
development cycle.
Queuing patch #3 on IMX tree will stands a good chance for conflicts
with other pci-imx6.c changes on PCI tree.
Shawn
Powered by blists - more mailing lists