[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BY5PR04MB67052E848BB5D7327454FEC2FC0C0@BY5PR04MB6705.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2020 11:14:31 +0000
From: Avri Altman <Avri.Altman@....com>
To: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
"Martin K . Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
"James E . J . Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>
CC: "linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/2] scsi: ufs: Add DeepSleep feature
>
> On 5/10/20 12:51 pm, Avri Altman wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 5/10/20 11:02 am, Avri Altman wrote:
> >>> HI,
> >>>
> >>>> Drivers that wish to support DeepSleep need to set a new capability flag
> >>>> UFSHCD_CAP_DEEPSLEEP and provide a hardware reset via the existing
> >>>> ->device_reset() callback.
> >>> I would expect that this capability controls sending SSU 4, but it only
> controls
> >> the sysfs entry?
> >>
> >> The sysfs entry is the only way to request DeepSleep.
> > Some chipset vendors use their own modules, or even the device tree
> > to set their default rpm_lvl / spm_lvl.
>
> I would not expect them to set it wrongly but what are you suggesting?
Right. Let's leave it as it is.
Thanks,
Avri
Powered by blists - more mailing lists