[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190208103133.ysvaroyniuc3k4i5@vireshk-i7>
Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2019 16:01:33 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Samsung SoC <linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
Dave Gerlach <d-gerlach@...com>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] cpufreq/opp: rework regulator initialization
On 08-02-19, 11:22, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> There are cpufreq driver suspend and resume callbacks, maybe use them?
>
> The driver could do the I2C transactions in its suspend/resume
> callbacks and do nothing in online/offline if those are part of
> system-wide suspend/resume.
These are per-policy things that we need to do, not sure if driver
suspend/resume is a good place for that. It is more for a case where
CPU 0-3 are in one policy and 4-7 in another. Now 1-7 are
hot-unplugged during system suspend and hotplugged later on. This is
more like complete removal/addition of devices instead of
suspend/resume.
--
viresh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists