[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7heeoc3edk.fsf@baylibre.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2020 17:19:03 -0700
From: Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>
To: Sibi Sankar <sibis@...eaurora.org>, bjorn.andersson@...aro.org,
ulf.hansson@...aro.org, rjw@...ysocki.net
Cc: agross@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, pavel@....cz, len.brown@...el.com,
rnayak@...eaurora.org, dianders@...omium.org, khilman@...nel.org,
Sibi Sankar <sibis@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] PM / Domains: Add GENPD_FLAG_SUSPEND_ON flag
Sibi Sankar <sibis@...eaurora.org> writes:
> This is for power domains which needs to stay powered on for suspend
> but can be powered on/off as part of runtime PM. This flag is aimed at
> power domains coupled to remote processors which enter suspend states
> independent to that of the application processor. Such power domains
> are turned off only on remote processor crash/shutdown.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <sibis@...eaurora.org>
Seems like a useful use-case, but i think there should be a bit more
description/documentation about what is the expected/desired behavior
during system suspsend when a power-domain with this flag is already
runtime-PM suspended. Similarily, on system resume, what is the
expected/desired behavior?
Kevin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists